HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 32388 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. On 8.9.2018 RC Form 19 was issued against the petitioner for having made encroachment over the land being Gata Nos. 256, 257 and 258M. A vague objection was filed on 4.12.2018 without denying the fact that any encroachment has been made by petitioner on the land alleged by the Gaon Sabha. An eviction order was passed on 7.12.2024 imposing the damages. Against the order of eviction an appeal under Section 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was preferred. In paragraph no. 4 of the appeal it has been stated that Gata Nos. 256, 257 and 258M is recorded as the land of Mela and pond over which eviction proceeding cannot be initiated. Further, in paragraph no. 5 it has been stated that name of petitioner is recorded over Gata No. 258M for the fasli year 1430-1435 (2023-2028). The appellate authority had confirmed the order of eviction and dismissed the appeal. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the khatauni for the fasli year 1430-1435 clearly reflects that the name of the institution Sri Shiv Baba Mahavidyalaya/Manager Dudhnath is recorded over the Gata No. 258M alongwith other persons as bhumidhar with transferable rights. According to him, the order of eviction could not have been passed as far as Gata No. 258M is concerned over the area in which petitioner has been recorded as bhumidhar with transferable rights. 3. Learned Standing Counsel has defended the order passed by the revenue authorities. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amit Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla Dudhanath Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material on record. 5. From perusal of the objections filed by petitioner as well as memo of appeal, it is clear that petitioner has admitted the fact that he is not recorded owner of Gata Nos. 256 and 257 which is recorded as Mela land and pond in the revenue records which belongs to Gaon Sabha. Further, the khatauni reflects that petitioner is bhumidhar with transferable rights over the Gata No. 258M which is a big plot over which it has been alleged that encroachment has been made by petitioner to the some extent. As petitioner has not claimed over Gata Nos. 256 and 257 and from the records it is clear that it is the land of Gaon Sabha, no case for interference is made out. 6. Writ petition is misconceived and stands dismissed. 7. The revenue authorities are directed that while proceeding with eviction proceedings they shall remove the encroachment standing over the Gata Nos. 256 and 257 and after demarcating the land of petitioner on Gata No. 258M shall remove any encroachment, which is standing on the land of Gaon Sabha recorded as pond. September 16, 2025 Shekhar WRIC No. 32388 of 2025 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHI SHEKHAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad