Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:62357 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12420 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt Rajkumari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Priyanka Devi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Case called out in revised list. None appears on behalf of the petitioner to press the writ petition. 2. Heard learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the record. 3. This writ petition has been filed for the following relief: "i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing to the respondent no.2 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 24.3.2025 pending before him since 24.3.2025 forthwith or within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble court and further be pleased to direct the respondent no.3 not alienate the land in question gata No. 691, 250, 251, 152, 667, 675, 690 situated in village Jatoi Pargana and Tehsil Sadabad District Hathras." 4. From the perusal of the representation, which is sought to be decided by the petitioner, it is apparent that the dispute of the petitioner is with private respondent No. 3. 5. The Supreme Court in the case of Shalini Shyam Shetty v. Rajendra Shankar Patil, (2010) 8 SCC 329 has considered a large number of its earlier judgements and held that writ petition is not the proper remedy in respect of the property dispute and the party should be relegated to seek appropriate remedy before the Civil or Revenue Court. Paragraph nos. 64 and 65 of the judgment in Shalini Shyam Shetty (supra) are extracted hereinbelow-: "64. However, this Court unfortunately discerns that of late there is a growing trend amongst several High Courts to entertain writ petition in cases of pure property disputes. Disputes relating to partition suits, matters relating to execution of a decree, in cases of dispute between landlord and tenant and also in a case of money decree and in various other cases where disputed questions of property are involved, writ courts are entertaining such disputes. In some cases the High Courts, in a routine manner, entertain petitions under Article 227 over such disputes and such petitions are treated as writ petitions. 65. We would like to make it clear that in view of the law referred to above in cases of property rights and in disputes between private individuals writ court should not interfere unless there is any infraction of statute or it can be shown that a private individual is acting in collusion with a statutory authority. " 6. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy as available to him under law. Order Date :- 24.4.2025 Nitika Sri. (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad