Disposed¶16

Saddam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. and 8 Others

Allahabad HC10 Mar 2026WPIL/134/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

chakmarg encroachment removal; public land Gata No.327 Village Shivra Pargana & Tehsil Sadar District Pratapgarh; chak road Gata No.353 wheat sown by petitioner; Naib Tehsildar spot inspection with police force; SDM Sadar written instructions; direction to opposite parties no.3 and 4; PIL disposed; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Subhash Vidyarthi, J.; March 10, 2026; WPIL No. 134 of 2026; Saddam v. State of U.P.

What did the court decide?

Direction to opposite parties no.3 and 4 to remove illegal encroachments over land bearing Gata No.327, Village Shivra, Pargana & Tehsil Sadar, District Pratapgarh, recorded in the revenue records as chakmarg, even if the encroachment has been made by the petitioner himself. ¶16

Saddam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. and 8 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 134 of 2026

Saddam

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. And 8 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Lalji Yadav, Vishnu Prakash : Counsel for Respondent(s) C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta

¶7

Court No. - 17

¶8

HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

¶9

Heard Sri Lalji Yadav, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Dheeraj Ojha, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

¶10

By means of the instant petition filed in public interest the petitioner has sought issuance of a direction to the opposite parties no.2 and 3 to ensure removal of illegal encroachment made over land bearing Gata No.327, situated in Village Shivra, Pargana & Tehsil Sadar, District Pratapgarh, which is recorded in the revenue records as a chakmarg.

¶11

On the basis of written instructions provided by Sub Divisional Magistrate Sadar, District Pratapgarh the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that a team of revenue officials had visited the spot for carrying out an inspection under the supervision of Naib Tehsildar along with police force, wherein it was found that the petitioner himself has sown wheat on a part of chak road bearing Gata No.353 and he has assured that he will remove the alleged encroachment. A copy of instructions is taken on record.

¶12

The learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the petitioner has filed the writ petition with false averments. The petitioner himself has found to have made encroachments on the public land bearing Gata No.327, which is recorded in the revenue records as

WPIL No. 134 of 2026

a chakroad.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed off with a direction to the opposite parties no.3 and 4 to remove illegal encroachments made over land bearing Gata No.327, situated in Village Shivra, Pargana & Tehsil Sadar, District Pratapgarh, which is recorded in the revenue records as a chakmarg, even if the encroachment has been made by the petitioner himself.

¶17

March 10, 2026

¶18

Ram.

¶19

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Saddam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saddam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko. and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vimla Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Sateesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Panchayati Raj Sectt. Lko. and 2 Others

Parvez Ahmad Khan vs Mahmoodabad Law College Thru. Prin. and Ors.

Kulbir Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Station in Charge Office Lko.

Dharmenda Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Hariram Pandey vs Addl. Distt. Judge Xth Distt. Faizabad Now Ayodhya and 5 Others