Petitioner seeking writ relief regarding land patta and possession dispute. Court held matter involves factual inquiry requiring evidence, not suitable for writ jurisdiction. Directs petitioner to approach under Article 227 for quashing of impugned order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:1849-DB
Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 187 of 2025 Petitioner :- Raja Ram Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravi Shanker Singh,Kirti Veer Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta
Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
Heard.
The petitioner claims to be Bhoomidhar of Gata No. 315 situated in Village - Mishraulia Gosaee, Tehsil - Mankapur, District - Gonda. The opposite party no. 7 has been granted patta for housing purposes under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and the Rules made thereunder, over part of land bearing Gata No. 316, which is recorded as Banjar land.
The submission is that the area of Gata No. 316 on the spot is less than what is reflected in the Khatauni . Likewise, the area of Gata No. 315 is also less. Accordingly, the petitioner has initiated proceedings for correction of map pertaining to Gata No. 315 which are pending. Simultaneously, he has also initiated proceedings for cancellation of patta granted to opposite party no. 7 which are also pending. In the meantime, the opposite party no. 7 is interfering in the possession of the petitioner.
This is not a dispute amenable to writ jurisdiction, as it involves a factual inquiry, which will necessitate adducing of evidence. The petitioner should seek other remedies.
As regards, relief no. 2, the petitioner if aggrieved, should file a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in view of the order dated 23.11.2024 passed in Writ C No. 10001 of 2024 referring to a decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1981 SC 723; S.K. Sarkar, Member, Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow Vs. Vinay Chandra Misra.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Order Date :- 10.1.2025/Lokesh Kumar
[Brij Raj Singh, J.] [Rajan Roy, J.]
Digitally signed by :- LOKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether current dispute compasses a factual inquiry necessitating evidence and therefore is not amenable to writ jurisdiction.
Whether petitioner aggrieved by order dated 23.11.2024 in Writ C No. 10001 of 2024 should seek relief under Article 227.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
S.K. Sarkar, Member, Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow Vs. Vinay Chandra MisraReferred¶9
AIR 1981 SC 723; S.K. Sarkar, Member, Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow Vs. Vinay Chandra Misra · Who else cites this
Raja Ram
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 6 Others
Rajan Roy
Brij Raj Singh
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
