Joothan Maurya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Joothan Maurya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner permitted to approach the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate (third respondent), who is to constitute a revenue team, demarcate the petitioner's plot on the spot after notice and in his presence, and, if any part of the land is found utilised by respondents, restore it or pay compensation per the applicable Government Order, all within two months.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent-Gaon Sabha is constructing a paved-way on the petitioner's land without any acquisition proceedings or his consent. +2 more

Court's answer

If, on such demarcation, any part of the petitioner's land is found to be utilised by the respondents, the respondent-authorities shall restore it or pay compensation in accordance with the applicable Government Order; all such action shall be completed within a period of two months.

Ratio / Principle

This court permitted the petitioner to approach the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of the area concerned (the third respondent) to seek resolution of the dispute.

Key takeaways

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate is directed to constitute a revenue team and ensure that the petitioner's plot is demarcated on the spot; the demarcation is to be undertaken after notice to the petitioner and done in his presence.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (double bench), Court No. 29, WRIT - C No. 4027 of 2025 (order dated 21.3.2025; neutral citation 2025:AHC:41742-DB): Joothan Maurya v. State of U.P. & 3 others (with impleadment application by Deep Narayan). Petitioner's grievance was that a paved-way was being laid on his land by the respondent-Gaon Sabha without acquisition proceedings or consent. Pursuant to the court's earlier order dated 7th March, 2025, instructions indicated a pre-existing passage, no encroachment, and at best a demarcation issue, with a remedy pointed to under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code. Disposing of the writ petition, the court permitted the petitioner to approach the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate (third respondent), directed constitution of a revenue team for on-spot demarcation of the petitioner's plot after notice and in his presence, and held that if any part of his land is found utilised by the respondents, it shall be restored or compensation paid in accordance with the applicable Government Order, all such action to be completed within two months.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41742-DB

Court No. - 29

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4027 of 2025

Petitioner :- Joothan Maurya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kukmar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi,C.S.C.

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. B.P. Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent-Gaon Sabha, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Babu Lal Ram, Advocate who has filed impleadment application on behalf of Deep Narayan.

Grievance of the petitioner is that paved-way is being constructed on the petitioner's land by the respondent-Gaon Sabha without any acquisition proceedings or his consent.

Pursuant to the order dated 7th March, 2025, instructions have been received by the learned Standing Counsel, which are taken on record. As per these instructions, a passage existed from before and that there is no encroachment on the petitioner's land. It is also submitted that at best there is an issue of demarcation for which the remedy would be before competent forum under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code.

Learned counsel for Deep Narayan, who has filed impleadment application also states that none of the petitioner's land has been encroached.

In the facts of the case we permit the petitioner to approach the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of the area concerned i.e. third respondent, who will constitute a revenue team and would ensure that the plot of the petitioner is demarcated on the spot. Such demarcation would be undertaken after notice to the petitioner and would be done in his presence. If on such demarcation it is found that any part of the petitioner's land is utilized by the

respondents, the respondent-authorities shall restore the same or pay compensation in accordance with the applicable Government Order. All such action shall be taken within a period of two months.

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.

(Donadi Ramesh, J.) (Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.)

Order Date :- 21.3.2025 Sushil/-

Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad