Mohd. Khaleeq and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Urban Development Lko. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 8626 of 2025

¶3

Mohd. Khaleeq And 8 Others

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Urban Development Lko. And Another

¶7

eveopmen o. n noer	.....Respo	ndent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) :	Ravi Shanker Tewari, Srivastava, Rakesh Kumar Shasank Sonu, Vishwakant Sriv	Anchal Verma, astava
Counsel for Respondent(s) :	C.S.C., Namit Sharma, Rajesh Singh	Kumar

¶8

Court No. - 2

¶9

HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing counsel for the State Respondent no. 1 and Shri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.2- Nagar Nigam.

¶11

This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:-

¶12

"(i). Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 01.07.2025 passed by opposite party no.2 contained in Annexure no.P-1, in pursuance to the notice dated 26.05.2025 issued by the opposite party no. 2 contained in Annexure P-2 ;

¶13

( ii). issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties especially the opposite party no. 2 not to interfere in the peaceful use, occupation, enjoyment and possession of the petitioners over the property in question without setting the identity of Gata No.94 established in accordance with law."

¶14

It is the case of the petitioners, who are nine in number that they had bought certain portion of land of Gata No.95 through various sale-deeds from Uttarakhand Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd., Gandhi Nagar Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd., Virendra Pratap Singh, who had himself bought the land from one of the Co-operative Societies and Sushila Negi, who had also bought the same from the Co-operative Societies as aforesaid.

¶15

The sale deeds executed in 1988, 1989 and 2012 relate to 14750 Sq.ft area of Gata No.95 and petitioners have built a marriage hall and a boundary wall surrounding the said land. The Nagar Nigam has issued notice on 26.05.2025 to the petitioners saying that the construction was found in Gata No.94 area

¶16

WRIC No. 8626 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

0.163 hectare recorded in revenue records as a pond. The area of 60 sq.mts. that has been a part of of the land of Gata No.94 had been encroached upon by the petitioners and they should produce documents relating to ownership of the land of 60 sq.mts which have been encroached on Gata No.94 within 15 days or else, proceedings shall be undertaken for demolition of the encroachment on the pond land.

¶19

The Petitioners submitted a reply on 11.06.2025 but they have received the impugned order dated 01.07.2025 wherein it has been stated that the measurement was done of the encroachment of pond land i.e. Gata No.94 by the team of Nagar Nigam and Revenue Officials of Tehsil Sadar on 25.04.2025 and then again another team was constituted of revenue officials of Tehsil Sadar, of Nagar Nigam and team of P.W.D. on 22.05.2025 and it was found that the petitioners were in occupation of 60 sq.mts of Gata No.94 recorded as pond which has vested in the Nagar Nigam.

¶20

The respondents have rejected the reply of the petitioners on the basis of an ex-parte measurement done of the alleged encroachment on Gata No.94.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the petitioners have bought land from Co-operative Societies, who in turn had bought the same from Scheduled Caste Members of such Co-operative Societies and the petitioners were forced to approach this Court earlier in a matter under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in Writ Petition No.4777 of 2025 (Mohd. Khaleeq and 8 others vs. State of U.P..and others). When the Nagar Nigam had started to demolish certain portion of constructions of the petitioners on Plot No.95. It has been submitted that originally the sale made in favour of the Co-operative Societies by Scheduled Caste Members of such Society was held to be violative of Section 157 Ka of The U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and the proceedings under Section 166/167 were taken which resulted in passing of an order on 24.07.2025 by the Assistant Collector,-Ist Class, Lucknow holding that such sale-deeds were executed without permission of the Collector and the land which the Scheduled Caste Members had sold to the Cooperative Societies was directed to have vested in the State.

¶22

The petitioners had filed a revision before the Additional Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow in which initially, an interim order was granted staying the order of vesting in the State Government. This interim order, however, was not extended by the Additional Commissioner on 26.07.2025 and the petitioners approached this Court in the aforesaid matter under Article 227 of the Constitution, and the Court had directed the learned counsel for the Nagar Nigam to seek instructions in the matter and the learned counsel for

¶23

WRIC No. 8626 of 2025

¶24

3

¶25

Nagar Nigam has stated that they did not intend to demolish or interfere in the possession of the property of the petitioners situated on plot No.95, Khurram Nagar. The order of the Nagar Nigam related to demolishing of property situated on plot Nos. 93 and 94 which were recorded as “banjar” and “talab” land in the revenue records and the occupants of Plot Nos.93 and 94 had already been issued notices asking them to submit their objections and only after following the procedure prescribed by law, the Nagar Nigam shall demolish the structures on Plot No.93 and 94, Khurram Nagar.

¶26

Taking into account such submission made by the learned counsel for Nagar Nigam, this court had set aside the order of the Additional Commissioner dated 26.07.2025 refusing to extend the interim order. A copy of the order passed by this Court dated 07.08.2025 under Article 227 No.4777 of 2025 Neutral Citation No.-2025:AHC-LKO:46119 has been filed as Annexure 8 to the writ petition.

¶27

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are in occupation of Plot No.95 on the basis of valid sale-deeds which have not been set aside. The Nagar Nigam has carried out some measurement and demarcation of some structures situated on Gata Nos.93 and 94 recorded as “banjar” and “talab” respectively, in the revenue records without notice to the petitioners and without involving them in such measurement and demarcation exercise and the revenue team along with Nagar Nigam Officials have wrongly included constructions which the petitioners have validly made on 14750 sq.ft of land of Gata No.95 which belongs to them as they have bought it through valid sale-deeds.

¶28

The learned counsel for Nagar Nigam on the basis of oral instructions from respondent no. 2 has stated that no notice was issued to the petitioners while making measurement and demarcation on Gata Nos.93 and 94.

¶29

Since the order has been passed in presence of counsel for the petitioners, we direct the respondent No.2 to hold such measurement and demarcation exercise in the presence of counsel for the petitioners and the petitioners on 25.09.2025. It is expected that the petitioners shall remain present at the time of measurement and demarcation and cooperate.

¶30

After such demarcation exercise is carried out in accordance with the procedure prescribed in law, an appropriate order shall be passed by the respondent no.2 with regard to encroachment if any, found on Gata Nos.93 and 94, Khurram Nagar within a period of three weeks thereafter.

¶31

For a period of five weeks or till the order is passed by the competent

¶32

WRIC No. 8626 of 2025

¶33

4

¶34

authority of the respondent no.2, the exercise of demolition as proposed by the Nagar Nigam, shall remain in abeyance.

¶35

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶36

(Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.)

¶37

September 11, 2025 Pks

¶38

Digitally signed by :- POOJA SETH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Khaleeq and 8 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Urban Development Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Khaleeq and 8 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Urban Development Lko. and Another

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

Akhilesh Kumar Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru.Its Addl. Secy. Urban Development Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Rup Vs District Magistrate, Bahraich and 3 Others

Mamta Gupta and Ors. Vs District Magistrate Barabanki and Ors.

Arvind Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Akhtar Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 4 Others

Geeta Kumari Mandal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 4 Others