Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 69454 (ALL)

VIKAS KUMAR YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIC/20426/2025 · 2025-07-15

Rohit Ranjan Agarwal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115073 Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20426 of 2025 Petitioner :- Vikas Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jitdendra Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep Singh,Saroj Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J. [Civil Misc. Impleadment Application No. 2 of 2025] 1. Impleadment application is allowed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to carry out necessary impleadment in the array of parties during the course of the day. [Order on Petition] 1. I have heard respective counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 2. From perusal of the record, it transpires that it is a private dispute between the petitioner and newly impleaded respondent no. 6. 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 6 has invited the attention of the Court to paragraph nos. 7 and 8 of the writ petition, according to which petitioner is the owner in possession of arazi no. 389 while the chak marg exists on arazi no. 390 and arazi no. 391 is the land of Gaon Sabha recorded as banjar in the revenue records. 4. Petitioner claimed that his grandfather during his lifetime had planted several trees over arazi no. 389 and also on arazi no. 390 and now a chak marg is being constructed over arazi no. 390. Petitioner is aggrieved by constructions of chak marg over arazi no. 390. 5. Newly impleaded respondent no. 6 has opposed the prayer made by petitioner and claims that the land in question does not belongs to petitioner and the said land had already been recorded as chak marg over which construction is being made. 6. Petitioner, on the other hand, is claiming that newly impleaded respondent no. 6 has encroached upon the chak marg. 7. This Court finds that it is a private dispute between two persons, who do not want any construction over arazi no. 390. As chak marg is being constructed for the benefit of local persons residing therein, no interference is required by this Court. 8. Writ petition is misconceived and is dismissed, accordingly. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Shekhar Digitally signed by :- SHASHI SHEKHAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad