Shailendra Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And

who appears for the State-respondents, Shri Manoj Kumar Mishra, who has put in appearance on behalf of respondent nos.9 to 13 by filing his 'vakalatnama', which is taken on record, and perused the record.

2. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner with following main prayers: "a. a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing to the respondent no. 4 to 8/state authorities not to interfere in the peaceful possession of petitioner over the land in question and further be directed to respondent no. 1 to 3 to take suitable action against opposite party nos. 4 to 8/ state authorities for his deliberate illegal and unlawful action of depriving peaceful possession of petitioner over land in question bearing New Gata No. 373 (old Gata No.777 having area of 0- 9-10), possession of which trying to handed over to opposite party no. to 9 to 13, by demolishing the north side boundary wall made with the iron pipe covered with Tin shed of Chamber of petitioner's son namely Shivam Singh who is Junior Advocate, situated in aforesaid land in question, forcefully without any authority and order of competent court of law. b. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding opposite party no. 1 to 3 to decide the representation of petitioner dated 05.08.2025 contained as annexure No.1 to this writ petition. 2 WRIC No. 8026 of 2025 c. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the State authorities specially opposite party nos. 4 to 8, not to disturb peaceful possession of petitioner over land in question bearing New Gata No. 373 (old Gata No.777 having area of 0-9-10), and further be directed to State authorities to compensate the petitioner for the illegal and arbitrary deprivation of petitioner to his property by opposite party no. 4 to 8."

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the Khatauni and Khasara of 1356 Fasli, the name of petitioner's ancestor/grand mother Smt. Gunraj Kunvri w/ of Ganga Bux Singh was recorded as Shikami possessor before 9 years. The name was again mentioned in the Khatauni and Khasara of 1359 Fasli. Similarly recording of a previous possessor is also mentioned in later Khatauni, but during 1969-70, consolidation proceedings started in the Village Malapur Jagdishpur under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. The petitioner's grand mother submitted an application for declaration of her rights before the Assistant Consolidation Officer, Kadipur claiming her continued possession and habitation over said Gata No.777. The Assistant Consolidation Officer, Kadipur referred the dispute to the Consolidation Officer, Kadipur. The land was in the name of Ram Sundar and Shiv Baran. The Consolidation Officer, Kadipur passed an ex parte order on

29.09.1972 without providing an opportunity of hearing to the grand mother of the petitioner. The entry regarding possession of his grand mother was cancelled and the name recorded tenure holder was Ram Sundar and Ram Baran. His grand mother died and father of the petitioner filed an appeal before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation), Sultanpur. No recall application was filed on wrong legal advice. The appeal was decided on the basis of a compromise and the respondents thereafter filed a revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The revision was allowed in favour of predecessor-in-interest of the respondent nos.9 to 13. The petitioner filed a writ petition thereafter, which was dismissed.

4. In the meantime, civil suit has also been filed for declaration and for permanent injunction before the Civil Judge (J.D.), Kadipur, District Sultanpur bearing No.52 of 2025; Sunil Kumar and others versus Anil Kumar and others. The civil court has issued notice to the defendants and fixed the next date for decision on interim injunction application. The 3 WRIC No. 8026 of 2025 defendants had appeared in the suit and have filed their written statement and a commission was issued in which it was found that an Advocate chamber covered with tin shed was found on the spot, which belongs to the petitioner's son.

5. Now the respondents have forcibly taken over the land/possession of the petitioner by demolishing the northern side of the boundary wall and tin shed and chamber of the petitioner's son situated over the land in dispute. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.

6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.9 to 13 placed before this Court a detailed order passed in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of respondent nos.9 to 13 by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on

03.06.1999 and an order passed in Writ Petition No.503 (Cons) of 1999; Dashrath Singh versus D.D.C./D.M. Sultanpur and others by the High Court dismissing the writ petition. Against the order passed by the High Court dated 11.11.2021, the petitioners approached Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.8807 of 2022, which was dismissed on 17.05.2022, copy of such order has also been placed before this Court, which are taken on record.

7. It has been submitted by learned counsel for respondents that after such order was passed in S.L.P., the petitioner has moved recall application before the Consolidation Officer against order dated 29.09.1972. He has also moved the original suit.

8. The dispute being private in nature involving disputed question of facts, this Court finds no good ground to show interference.

9. The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to pursue Civil Suit No.52 of 2025 and the application for interim injunction filed therein. August 25, 2025 Anupam S/- (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

who appears for the State-respondents, Shri Manoj Kumar Mishra, who has put in appearance on behalf of respondent nos.9 to 13 by filing his 'vakalatnama', which is taken on record, and perused the record.

2. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner with following main prayers: "a. a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing to the respondent no. 4 to 8/state authorities not to interfere in the peaceful possession of petitioner over the land in question and further be directed to respondent no. 1 to 3 to take suitable action against opposite party nos. 4 to 8/ state authorities for his deliberate illegal and unlawful action of depriving peaceful possession of petitioner over land in question bearing New Gata No. 373 (old Gata No.777 having area of 0- 9-10), possession of which trying to handed over to opposite party no. to 9 to 13, by demolishing the north side boundary wall made with the iron pipe covered with Tin shed of Chamber of petitioner's son namely Shivam Singh who is Junior Advocate, situated in aforesaid land in question, forcefully without any authority and order of competent court of law. b. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding opposite party no. 1 to 3 to decide the representation of petitioner dated 05.08.2025 contained as annexure No.1 to this writ petition. 2 WRIC No. 8026 of 2025 c. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the State authorities specially opposite party nos. 4 to 8, not to disturb peaceful possession of petitioner over land in question bearing New Gata No. 373 (old Gata No.777 having area of 0-9-10), and further be directed to State authorities to compensate the petitioner for the illegal and arbitrary deprivation of petitioner to his property by opposite party no. 4 to 8."

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the Khatauni and Khasara of 1356 Fasli, the name of petitioner's ancestor/grand mother Smt. Gunraj Kunvri w/ of Ganga Bux Singh was recorded as Shikami possessor before 9 years. The name was again mentioned in the Khatauni and Khasara of 1359 Fasli. Similarly recording of a previous possessor is also mentioned in later Khatauni, but during 1969-70, consolidation proceedings started in the Village Malapur Jagdishpur under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. The petitioner's grand mother submitted an application for declaration of her rights before the Assistant Consolidation Officer, Kadipur claiming her continued possession and habitation over said Gata No.777. The Assistant Consolidation Officer, Kadipur referred the dispute to the Consolidation Officer, Kadipur. The land was in the name of Ram Sundar and Shiv Baran. The Consolidation Officer, Kadipur passed an ex parte order on

29.09.1972 without providing an opportunity of hearing to the grand mother of the petitioner. The entry regarding possession of his grand mother was cancelled and the name recorded tenure holder was Ram Sundar and Ram Baran. His grand mother died and father of the petitioner filed an appeal before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation), Sultanpur. No recall application was filed on wrong legal advice. The appeal was decided on the basis of a compromise and the respondents thereafter filed a revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The revision was allowed in favour of predecessor-in-interest of the respondent nos.9 to 13. The petitioner filed a writ petition thereafter, which was dismissed.

4. In the meantime, civil suit has also been filed for declaration and for permanent injunction before the Civil Judge (J.D.), Kadipur, District Sultanpur bearing No.52 of 2025; Sunil Kumar and others versus Anil Kumar and others. The civil court has issued notice to the defendants and fixed the next date for decision on interim injunction application. The 3 WRIC No. 8026 of 2025 defendants had appeared in the suit and have filed their written statement and a commission was issued in which it was found that an Advocate chamber covered with tin shed was found on the spot, which belongs to the petitioner's son.

5. Now the respondents have forcibly taken over the land/possession of the petitioner by demolishing the northern side of the boundary wall and tin shed and chamber of the petitioner's son situated over the land in dispute. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.

6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.9 to 13 placed before this Court a detailed order passed in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of respondent nos.9 to 13 by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on

03.06.1999 and an order passed in Writ Petition No.503 (Cons) of 1999; Dashrath Singh versus D.D.C./D.M. Sultanpur and others by the High Court dismissing the writ petition. Against the order passed by the High Court dated 11.11.2021, the petitioners approached Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.8807 of 2022, which was dismissed on 17.05.2022, copy of such order has also been placed before this Court, which are taken on record.

7. It has been submitted by learned counsel for respondents that after such order was passed in S.L.P., the petitioner has moved recall application before the Consolidation Officer against order dated 29.09.1972. He has also moved the original suit.

8. The dispute being private in nature involving disputed question of facts, this Court finds no good ground to show interference.

9. The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to pursue Civil Suit No.52 of 2025 and the application for interim injunction filed therein. August 25, 2025 Anupam S/- (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench