HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6093 of 2026 Court No. - 53 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. The present application has been preferred by the applicants who happen to be the sons of the original writ petitioner in Writ-B No. 1400 of 2025 in which on 16.04.2025 following order was passed.- "Amongst others what is clear is that the petitioner is entitled to retain possession of the land in dispute on which his house stands by virtue of the decree dated 24.04.1979 passed by the learned District Judge, Bijnor in Civil Appeal No. 247 of 1978 which prima facie has become final between parties. Issue notice. Notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 7 is accepted by Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ray, learned Standing Counsel. He is granted two weeks time to file a counter affidavit. Steps to serve respondent no. 8 shall be taken by RPAD within three days. List for admission on 02.05.2025 along with a report regarding service together with the postal track attached. The office shall also put in a report regarding status of pleadings. Until further orders of this Court, the respondents are restrained from dispossessing the petitioner or demolishing his house in Plot No. 382 situate in village Ajabnagar, Pargana Batapur, Tehsil Nageena, District Bijnor. Let this order be communicated to the Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Nageena (now Dhampur), District Bijnor and the Tehsildar, Tehsil Nageena (now Dhampur), District Bijnor through the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor by the Registrar (Compliance) within 24 hours." 2. Allegation of the learned counsel for the applicant is that though there happens to be a stay order in favour of the original applicant and now the applicants who are successors-in-interest who have stepped into the shoes of the deceased with regard to restraining the opposite parties from dispossessing them or demolishing the house in Plot No. 382 situate in Village Ajabnagar, Pargana Batapur, Tehsil Nageena, District Bijnor, however the opposite party has issued notice to the applicants to remove the encroachments over Gata No. 383. Submission of the learned counsel for the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Krishna Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Mohd Dilshad Hussain And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) Sri Surendra Pratap Singh .....Opposite Party(s) applicant is that Gata No. 383 has been wrongly mentioned as the eviction is being directed to be done from Gata No. 382. 3. In the opinion of the Court, the question whether Gata No. 382 is being treated to be Gata No. 383 while alleging encroachment is a question which needs factual determination. Once the applicants have themselves responded to the said notice, then the remedy lies elsewhere and not in the present contempt application. 4. Accordingly, the contempt application is consigned to record leaving it open to the applicants to take remedies as permissible and advisable under law. September 8, 2026 Rajesh CAPL No. 6093 of 2026 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad