HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31329 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that proceeding under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was initiated against the petitioner, which is not in accordance with law. According to petitioner he has purchased the house in question from one Jarrar Ahmad and is residing herein since then. According to him, there is no encroachment over the pond which is recorded as Gata No. 772. 3. Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the writ petition and submitted that the house in question exists over Gata No. 772, which is recorded in category 6 (1) as pond. He further submits that in the objections petitioner has not mentioned as to on which gata the house in question is standing. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, it is apparent that Gata No. 772 is recorded in category 6 (1) as pond during consolidation proceeding. The revenue entries in CH Form 45 also reveals that the land in question has been recorded as pond. The area of the said pond is 8 bigha 7 biswa. From perusal of the objections filed by petitioner it is clear that only it has been mentioned before the revenue authorities that he has purchased the house in question from one Jarrar Ahmad and there is no averment as to on which gata his house stands. Neither any ground has been taken in the appeal filed under Section 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 as to the house being situated on Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vachaspati Panday Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sher Bahadur Singh Vaseem .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) some other gata. 5. Going through the record, I find that there is no denial from the side of petitioner as the house in question exists on Gata No. 772, which is recorded as pond in the revenue records, after consolidation proceedings. Once factual situation is that Gata No. 772 is a pond and petitioner has not taken any ground that his house is not standing over the said gata, no case for interference is made out. 6. Writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. September 10, 2025 Shekhar WRIC No. 31329 of 2025 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHI SHEKHAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad