Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6048 (ALL)

RAJENDRA SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIC/708/2025 · 2025-03-04

Anish Kumar Gupta, Manoj Kumar Gupta

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31753-DB Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 708 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rajendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- S.K. Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. The instant petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to take possession or dig soil from petitioners' plot No. 295, 294, 175, and 146 situated at Village Babu Singh Ka Dera, Sarkandi, Tehsil Fatehpur, District Fatehpur and also not to dispossess the petitioner except in accordance with law. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is Bhumidhar of the aforesaid plots. The respondents are taking soil from the plots of the petitioner and while widening an existing road they are threatening to take possession of some part of the land of the petitioner. 3. The respondents were granted time to obtain written instructions. In compliance of the said order, respondents no. 2 and 3 have furnished the written instructions. According to it, on the application of the petitioner dated 27.12.2024, a team of revenue officials was constituted and the said team, after due intimation to the petitioner, carried out demarcation at the site on 30.01.2025. It has submitted a report dated 03.02.2025 (Annexure 6 to the written instructions), according to which, the work of widening of chak road is being undertaken under Pradhan Mantri Sadak Yojana- phase 3, Batch 1. The chak road is over Gata No. 240 and the entire work is being done over Gata No. 240 and the Bhumidhari land of the petitioner is not getting affected. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, seriously disputes the stand taken by the respondents. He submits that the respondents are in the process of widening the road and the land of the petitioner is getting affected. 5. We of the considered opinion that in writ jurisdiction, it would not be proper to examine the said factual issue. The petitioner has remedy of getting his holding demarcated under Section 24 of U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006, apart from the remedy of civil suit under common law. 6. Accordingly, we dispose of the instant petition with liberty to the petitioner to avail any of the aforesaid remedies. We also reserve liberty in favour of the petitioner to claim compensation, if in any duly constituted proceedings, it is established that any part of the land of the petitioner has been taken over by the respondents without following the process of law. (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 5.3.2025 Ruhi H. Digitally signed by :- RUHI HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad