HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 15745 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents. 2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for the following relief:- "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 3 to check the spot of the litigation and direct Harish Chandra to leave 3-4j feet from the foundation of the petitioner and raise his construction in accordance with law. ii. Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 3j to direct the petitioner to raise his construction of his own land. iii. Any other suitable writ, orde or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the present case. iv. Award the costs of the writ petition throughout to the petitioner." 3. The dispute is essentially a private dispute between the petitioner and private respondent no. 5. Since the dispute is Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Hriday Narayan Pandey, Rakesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, C.S.C., Raj Kumar Singh, Rajendra Prasad Yadav Triveni Prasad .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) essentially a private dispute between the petitioner and private respondent no. 5, therefore, present writ petition is not the proper remedy as this Court cannot issue any direction against the private respondents under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy available under the law. October 6, 2025 Anjali WRIC No. 15745 of 2025 2 (Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad