Disposed¶20

Ved Prakash v. District Magistrate,Sultanpur and 2 Others

Allahabad HC30 Apr 2026WRIC/2295/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 226 writ petition, Sultanpur; Gaon Sabha road ('Rasta') construction over private Bhumidhari land; Gata No. 1108kha and Gata No. 1110; Lekhpal report; demarcation; Section 24 U.P. Revenue Code, 2006; mandamus to restrain Opp. Party No. 3; village Andaraypur, pargana Aldeymau, Tehsil Kadipur; writ petition disposed of with protective direction and liberty to apply for demarcation.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions: no road to be constructed by the Gaon Sabha on the land including Gata No. 1108 kha without demarcation; liberty to both the Gaon Sabha and the petitioner to apply under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for demarcation; any application filed by the petitioner to be considered and decided expeditiously. ¶20

Ved Prakash vs District Magistrate,Sultanpur and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the Gaon Sabha should be restrained from constructing a 'Rasta' (path) over the petitioner's Bhumidhari land, Gata No. 1108kha, village Andaraypur, pargana Aldeymau, Tehsil Kadipur, District Sultanpur, absent demarcation.

¶13

Court's answer

From the documents annexed to the writ petition, including the Lekhpal report, the 'Rasta' runs over Gata No. 1110 and the petitioner's land is recorded as Bhumidhari in his name.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

Without a demarcation being made by the Gaon Sabha with regard to the land including Gata No. 1108 kha, no road should be constructed by the Gaon Sabha.

¶15

Key takeaways

Both the Gaon Sabha and the petitioner are at liberty to file an application under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for demarcation; if the petitioner files such an application, the authority concerned shall consider and decide it expeditiously.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), WRIT - C No. 2295 of 2026 (Ved Prakash v. District Magistrate, Sultanpur and 2 others), decided April 30, 2026 (Shekhar B. Saraf and Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary, JJ.). Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India sought mandamus to restrain construction of a 'Rasta' over the petitioner's Bhumidhari land (Gata No. 1108kha, village Andaraypur, Tehsil Kadipur, District Sultanpur). Relying on documents including a Lekhpal report showing the Rasta running over Gata No. 1110, the Court directed that, absent demarcation by the Gaon Sabha covering Gata No. 1108 kha, no road be constructed by the Gaon Sabha. Both sides were given liberty to seek demarcation under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, with expeditious consideration of any application by the petitioner. Writ petition disposed of.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 2295 of 2026

Ved Prakash

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

District Magistrate,Sultanpur And 2 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Rajesh Kumar Shukla, Kaushlendra
	Pratap Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Mohan Singh

¶9

Court No. - 3

¶10

HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J.

¶11

1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

¶12

2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the writ petition has sought for the following substantial reliefs:-

¶13

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS thereby commanding the Opp. Party No. 1 &2 to restrain the Opp. Party No. 3 not to construct the Rasta in Bhumidhari land of the petitioner bearing land gata No. 1108kha, situated at village Andaraypur, pargana Aldeymau, Tehsil Kadipur, District Sultanpur, which is recorded in the name of the petitioner in the revenue record."

¶14

Upon perusal of the documents annexed to the writ petition, including the report of the Lekhpal, it appears that 'Rasta' is running over Gata No. 1110 and that the land of the petitioner is recorded as 'Bhumidhari' in the name of the petitioner.

¶15

In light of the same, without a demarcation being made by the Gaon Sabha with regard to the land including Gata No. 1108 kha, no road should be constructed by the Gaon Sabha.

¶16

We make it clear that both the Gaon Sabha and petitioner shall be at liberty to file appropriate application under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for the above demarcation. If such an

¶17

WRIC No. 2295 of 2026

¶18

¶19

application is filed by the petitioner, the authority concerned shall consider and decide the same expeditiously.

¶20

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶21

(Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.)

¶22

April 30, 2026 Anuj Singh

¶23

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

Ved Prakash v. District Magistrate,Sultanpur and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ved Prakash v. District Magistrate,Sultanpur and 2 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

Similar cases

Suman Tiwari vs the State U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Jamiluddin Alias Kalu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. and 4 Others

Satish Yadav vs Reserve Bank of India Having Its Office Thru. Governor and 2 Others

Shrikant Shukla vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Thru. Bank Manager Lko.

Uvaidullah vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of External Affairs New Delhi and 2 Others

Den Network Limited Thru. Authorised Representative/Power of Attorney Holder Faheem Ahmad Idrisi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Institutional Finance Lko. and 2 Others