Mamata Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. U.P. and 13 Others

Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10676 of 2024 Petitioner :- Mamata Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. U.P. And 13 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Singh,Shakeel Qureshi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶1Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶2Considering the order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to the private oppose parties is dispensed with.

¶3The contention of petitioner's counsel in nutshell is that after initial withdrawal of the earlier order of demarcation under Section 24 on the objections of the private opposite parties, fresh order was passed and the pillars ear-marking the boundaries of the Gatas in question was also installed but thereafter the private opposite parties have demolished the demarcation marks and are interfering in the possession of the petitioner. An FIR has also been lodged at the instance of the SDM but inspite of it, the private opposite parties are interfering in the petitioner's possession.

¶4We are of the opinion that the SDM concerned may consider proceedings under Sections 22 and 23, as the boundary marks have been damaged and take any further action as may be required, if Section 227 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is applicable against the concerned parties.

¶5If the petitioner is still aggrieved, he can can approach the Civil Court seeking an injunction or take recourse to such other proceedings as may be permissible in law. We make it clear that we have not adjudicated the rights, if any, of the private opposite parties.

¶6The writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 18.12.2024 Pks [Brij Raj Singh,J.] [Rajan Roy, J.] High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench