Shalimar Ksmb Projects, Lko. Thru. Partner Mr.Zakaria Mohammad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/ Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lko. and Others

Heard Sri Akbar Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing counsel on behalf of respondent No.s 1 to 5 while notice on behalf of opposite party No.6- Gaon Sabha has been accepted by Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey.

¶11

The grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition pertains to the order for eviction and imposition of penalty passed by Tehsildar, Lucknow in exercise of the powers under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code whereby by means of order dated 18.10.2023 he has held that the petitioner is in illegal occupation of gata No.16 which is 'Nali', 22 chakmarg and 26 as 'Nali' area 0.073 hectare situated at Village Ghaila, Pargana, Tehsil and District Lucknow.

¶12

The petitioner had preferred an appeal under Section 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code before Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Lucknow which has also been dismissed by means of order dated 22.10.2024 and in the present petition both the aforesaid orders have been assailed.

¶13

WRIC No. 7897 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a developer of real estate and construction projects and had undertaken to develop a residential township in the name and style of "Garden Bay" which spans over 72 acres located at Sitapur - Hardoi Link Road, Lucknow. The said project, according to the petitioner, has been sanctioned by Lucknow Development Authority and the petitioner has also obtained no objection certificate from various departments of the State Government. It has been further submitted that to develop the said township the petitioner purchased the lands by means of registered sale deed and also infused capital in form of pooling from the respective landlords in the said Village Ghaila.

¶16

The present dispute pertains to khasra No.26 measuring its area 0.0220 hectares which is recorded as drain ( naali) and in regard to the aforesaid land petitioner moved application under Section 161 of U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act, 1950 on 20.4.2014 before Additional District Magistrate for exchange of the said land with the land already purchased by the petitioner. It has been submitted that the matter was pending at the level of the State Government and various recommendations by various revenue authorities had also been given in favour of the petitioner. In this regard, it is stated that the land management committee had also submitted its report in favour of the petitioner and also similar reports were submitted by Area Lekhpal on 14.6.2019. It is further submitted that subsequently the issue was raised by the petitioner before various authorities and directions were issued to the District Magistrate to pass appropriate orders there in.

¶17

There is no dispute that the said matter remains pending and no final orders were passed on the application for exchange. It is submitted that subsequently U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act was abolished and provisions of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 came into effect in 2016 and initially in Section 101 a similar provision was incorporated and the decision was required to be taken by the State Government but subsequently vide notification issued in 2023 the relevant authority for passing order for exchange has been delegated to the Divisional Commissioner. It is in aforesaid circumstances that it is submitted that the petitioner had moved a fresh application before the Divisional Commissioner on 14.9.2023 which is pending till

¶18

WRIC No. 7897 of 2025

¶19

3

¶20

date.

¶21

It has been submitted that it is during pendency of the aforesaid proceeding that Tehsildar, Sadar, Lucknow had initiated the proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code for illegally occupying the land which is shown as Gaon Sabha land.

¶22

8 .The petitioner appeared in the proceedings and filed his objections and contested the said notice and stated that entire project has been approved by Lucknow Development Authority and further stated that the land which is sown as drain ( Naali) is not being utilized by any person or authority and accordingly sought to defend the said illegal occupation.

¶23

The Tehsildar duly noticed the objections but was of the view that the land is recorded as Gaon Sabha land and the petitioner could not demonstrate any right or title over the said land and accordingly held the petitioner to be in illegal occupation of same and passed orders for eviction and imposed penalty for an amount of Rs.4,20,000/.

¶24

The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 18.10.2023 passed by Tehsildar preferred an appeal under U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act where again similar grounds were taken by the petitioner which did not find favour with the appellate authority and accordingly the appeal was rejected by means of order dated 22.10.2023.

¶25

In the present writ petition, the petitioner has reiterated the submissions as noticed herein-above. It is noticed that at this stage no infirmity can be found with the orders of Tehsildar, Sadar, Lucknow or with the appellate authority in as much as the land is undoubtedly recorded as Gaon Sabha land on which the petitioner does not have any right, interest or title and, therefore, any occupation of the said and is unauthorized and illegal but on the other hand it is further noticed that the application of the petitioner for exchange is pending previously with the State Government and presently before opposite party No.2 i.e. Divisional Commissioner, Lucknow. In case the application of the petitioner is allowed then the petitioner would be legally entitled to occupy the disputed land and also raise constructions on the same. It seems that it is only on account of the fact that the respondents have not taken any

¶26

WRIC No. 7897 of 2025

¶27

4

¶28

decision on the application of the petitioner that situation has occurred where the proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code has been initiated against the petitioner.

¶29

Though as we have already noticed that we do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders but in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we find it appropriate to issue necessary direction to Divisional Commissioner, Lucknow to decide the application of the petitioner under Section 101 of U.P. Revenue Code, expeditiously say within a maximum period of four weeks form the date a certified copy of this order is placed before him, in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶30

It has further been informed that in compliance of the order of Tehsildar dated 18.10.2023 the petitioner has already deposited the amount of penalty amount of Rs.5,11,000/- as stated in para 21 of the writ petition and the only issue pertaining to eviction remains pending over the land on which the petitioner has no authority to raise constructions. Accordingly, a limited interference would meet the ends of justice and, therefore, for a period of four weeks from today or till the application of the petitioner is pending consideration before the Divisional Commissioner under Section 101 of U.P. Revenue Code, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.

¶31

It is made clear that once appropriate orders are passed by Divisional Commissioner, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law and in case the application of the petitioner under Section 101 is allowed liberty is granted to the petitioner to move appropriate application for recall of the order passed by Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Lucknow dated 22.10.2024, who shall pass fresh orders taking into account the orders passed by Divisional Commissioner under Section 101 of U.P. Revenue Code.

¶32

In case, the application for exchange is rejected the respondents shall proceed against the petitioner to comply with the orders passed under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code in accordance with law.

¶33

With aforesaid observations and directions, the petition stands

¶34

WRIC No. 7897 of 2025

5

(Alok Mathur,J.)

disposed of.

August 26, 2025 RKM.

¶39

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shalimar Ksmb Projects, Lko. Thru. Partner Mr.Zakaria Mohammad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/ Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shalimar Ksmb Projects, Lko. Thru. Partner Mr.Zakaria Mohammad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/ Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Gurumukh Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. through Secy. Revenue Lucknow and Others

Sukh Ram and Others Vs U.P. Board of Revenue Lko Thru. Judicial Member and Others

Mahender Kumar Tiwari and Others Vs Consolidation Officer, Tehsil Sadar, Sultanpur and Others

Baldeo and Ors. Vs D.D.C. and Ors.

Fatma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue, Lko. and Others

Manoj Kumar Tiwari and Others Vs Settlement Officer Consolidation, Bahraich and Others