Nazaruddin Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

Nazaruddin Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Apprehension of the petitioner redressed; writ petition disposed of on the basis of the Additional Chief Standing Counsel's statement that possession will be taken only after instituting proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, that the State authorities will not interfere with the petitioner's possession except in accordance with law, and that the petitioner will have adequate opportunity to present his case in any such proceedings.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's possession over a part of Gata No. 1310 Kha Minjumla can be interfered with by a mere notice issued by the Tehsildar, or whether proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code must first be instituted before any action is taken against the alleged encroachment.

Court's answer

In view of the statement made by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of the authority concerned (that possession would be taken only after instituting proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, that the State authorities will not interfere with the petitioner's possession except in accordance with law, and that the petitioner will have adequate opportunity to present his case in any such proceedings), the apprehension of the petitioner stands redressed.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition was disposed of in view of the aforesaid statement made by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of the authority concerned.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 2 | WRIT - C No. 5976 of 2025 | Nazaruddin v. State of U.P. thru Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, U.P., Lko. and 2 Others | Subhash Vidyarthi, J. | Decided 20.6.2025 | Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:35972. Petitioner challenged, under Article 226 of the Constitution, the notice dated 13.06.2025 of the Tehsildar, Fatehpur, District Barabanki asserting that Gata No. 1310 Kha Minjumla (area 6.965 hectares, Village Kursi, Pargana Kursi, Tehsil Fatehpur, District Barabanki) stands recorded in the name of the State and that the petitioner had encroached upon part of it, directing removal of possession within three days failing which forcible removal proceedings would follow. Petitioner's counsel contended that possession cannot be interfered with by a mere notice and that proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code should instead be instituted. On the Tehsildar's written instructions, the Additional Chief Standing Counsel submitted that physical inspection and demarcation had been undertaken only for correction of the revenue map under Section 30(2) U.P. Revenue Code without altering possession, that possession would be taken only after instituting Section 67 proceedings, that the State would not interfere except in accordance with law, and that the petitioner would have adequate opportunity in any such proceedings. Finding the petitioner's apprehension thereby redressed, the learned Single Member disposed of the writ petition on that statement; no independent adjudication of the encroachment claim was made.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35972

Court No. - 2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5976 of 2025

Petitioner :- Nazaruddin

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue U.P. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hairdaya Narain Tiwari,Ankit Kumar Pandey,Hari Mangal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

1. Heard Sri Hairdaya Narain Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Raj Bux Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Mohan Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.4/Gram Sabha.

2. By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the notice dated 13.06.2025 issued by the Tehsildar, Fatehpur, District Barabanki, stating that Gata No. 1310 Kha Minjumla, having an area of 6.965 hectares, situated in Village Kursi, Pargana Kursi, Tehsil Fatehpur, District Barabanki, is recorded in the name of the State.

3. A part of Gata No. 1310 Minjumla, which is adjacent to Gata No. 1310 Kha Minjumla, is recorded in the name of the petitioner. It has been alleged that the petitioner has taken possession of a part of Gata No. 1310 Kha Minjumla and thus encroached the land of the State Government. The petitioner was directed to remove his illegal

possession within three days, failing which legal proceedings would be instituted in accordance with law for forcible removal of the encroachment.

4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner's possession cannot be interfered with by merely issuing a notice by the Tehsildar and the proceedings in accordance with the law laid down in Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code should be instituted.

5. On the basis of written instructions provided by the Tehsildar, Fatehpur, District Barabanki, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has submitted that a physical inspection of the land was carried out for correction of the revenue map under the provisions of Section 30, sub-section (2), of the U.P. Revenue Code and physical demarcation of the land has been made on the spot but no proceedings for alteration of possession have been initiated. He has also stated that possession will be taken only after instituting proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code and the State authorities will not interfere with the possession of the petitioner except in accordance with law. In case any proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code is instituted, the petitioner will have adequate opportunity to present his case in those proceedings.

6. In view of the aforesaid statement made by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, the apprehension of the petitioner stands redressed.

7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in view of the aforesaid statement made by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of the authority concerned.

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J)

Order Date :- 20.6.2025 A.Dewal

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH DEWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench