Dismissed

Mushahab Ali v. Assistant Collector, I Class/ Tehsildar, Tehsil Bangarmau,Unnao and Others

Allahabad HC4 Nov 2025A227/6434/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition sought directions to the Tehsildar to register and decide execution applications enforcing ejectment orders against encroachers of public land. The court noted a prior order of 20.05.2025 already bound the revenue authorities, breach of which could be raised in contempt, and dismissed the petition.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mushahab Ali Vs Assistant Collector, I Class/… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6434 of 2025

Mushahab Ali

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Assistant Collector, I Class/ Tehsildar, Tehsil Bangarmau,Unnao And Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aman Agarwal Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

¶7

Court No. - 5

¶8

HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondent no.1.

¶10

In view of the proposed order, notice to respondent nos. 2 7, is dispensed with.

¶11

Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to direct the Assistant Collector, 1- Class/Tehsildar, Tehsil Bangarmau, District Unnao to register the Execution Case for making compliance with its own ejectment order dated 01.07.2024 passed in Case No. 02484 of 2020 "Gaon Sabha Vs. Shariyat" and order dated 24.04.2023 passed in Case No. 02486 of 2020 "Gaon Sabha Vs. Ali Mohammad" and order dated 01.07.2024 passed in Case No. 02487 of 2020 "State Vs. Sakir" and order dated 24.04.203 passed in Case No. 02488 of 2020 "Gaon Sabha Vs. Shamshad" and order dated 27.09.2024 passed in Case No. 2588 of 2024 "Gaon Sabha Vs. Naseem" and order dated 27.09.2024 passed in Case No. 2589 of 2024 "Gaon Sabha Vs. Sher Ali" filed by petitioner on 11.08.2025, 11.08.2025, 11.08.2025, 11.06.2025, 11.06.2025 and 11.06.2025, respectively, forthwith and further to direct the Assistant Collector, 1-Class/ Tehsildar, Tehsil Bangarmau, District Unnao to decide the execution applications dated 11.08.2025, 11.08.2025, 11.08.2025, 11.06.2025, 11.06.2025 and 11.06.2025 filed by the petitioner for making with ejectment order dated 01.07.2024 passed in Case No. 02484 of 2020 "Gaon Sabha Vs. Shariyat"

¶12

A227 No. 6434 of 2025

¶13

¶14

and order dated 24.04.2023 passed in Case No. 02486 of 2020 "Gaon Sabha Vs. Ali Mohammad" and order dated 01.07.2024 passed in Case No. 02487 of 2020 "State Vs. Sakir" and order dated 24.04.203 passed in Case No. 02488 of 2020 "Gaon Sabha Vs. Shamshad" and order dated 27.09.2024 passed in Case No. 2588 of 2024 "Gaon Sabha Vs. Naseem" and order dated 27.09.2024 passed in Case No. 2589 of 2024 "Gaon Sabha Vs. Sher Ali" in view of provisions rendered in paragraph-460 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual expeditiously, within stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court as contained in Annexure Nos. 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25 to this petition.

¶15

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a complainant and filed a complaint under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code which has concluded and the private respondents have been declared encroachers of the public utility land order ejectment as well as imposition and by means of the order dated 24.4.2023 the grievances raised by the petitioner that the Revenue Authorities are not executing the said order. In this regard it is notice that the petitioner had approached this Court by filing Writ Petition bearing Writ C No. 4512 of 2025, which was dismissed as withdrawn, but liberty was given to the petitioner to move an application under Section 460 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual and the same directed to be decided as per law.

¶16

Considering the fact that once an order by Revenue Authorities has already issued by this Court on 20.5.2025, then they are bound by the said order and in violation of the said order the petitioner has a liberty to move an appropriate application for contempt.

¶17

In light of the above, no further directions are required to pass in the present writ petition, where orders are already existing.

¶18

Subject to the aforesaid directions, the petition is dismissed.

¶19

(Alok Mathur,J.)

¶20

November 4, 2025 Muk

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mushahab Ali v. Assistant Collector, I Class/ Tehsildar, Tehsil Bangarmau,Unnao and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mushahab Ali v. Assistant Collector, I Class/ Tehsildar, Tehsil Bangarmau,Unnao and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Reeta Devi Vs Tehsildar, Tahsil Jalalpur, Ambedkar Nagar and Another

Sudha Singh Vs Tehsildar Judicial, Tehsil Bikapur, Ayodhya and Another

Smt. Mafidul Nisha Vs Divisional Magistrate, Sultanpur and Others

Sidhnath and Another Vs Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Patti, Pratapgarh and 6 Others

Saiphal @ Adalti Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lko. and Others

Geeta and Another Vs Tehsildar, Judicial, Tehsil Rudauli, Ayodhya and Another