JUDGMENT :

Prakash Padia, J.

1. The petitioners have preferred the present Public Interest Litigation for quashing of the order dated 12.1.2018 passed by the respondent No. 3 namely Deputy Collector/Deputy District Magistrate with further prayer to issue a mandamus directing the respondents to remove the illegal encroachment over the Talab No. 1533 new No. 1972 area 01 bigha 19 biswa.

2. While entertaining the writ petition following order was passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court on 30.5.2018:

"Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the order dated 12.1.2018 had been passed after certain manipulation of records and therefore the encroachments over the pond situate in plot No. 1533 are not being cleared.

It is therefore directed that the Tehsildar, Tehsil-Karchhana, District Allahabad by means of an affidavit would bring on record as to whether the records have actually been manipulated.

Issue notice to respondents No. 6 and 7.

List this case on 30.7.2018.

The petitioner may apply to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Karchhana, District Allahabad for the protection of the property and if the latter finds that there is actual possibility of the property getting wasted away he may make arrangements for its protection."

3. Pursuant to the same an affidavit has been filed by the respondent No. 4/Tehsildar, Tehsil Karchhanna, District Allahabad stating therein that from perusal of khasra of 1359 fasli it is clear that Gata No. 1533 is in the shape of Gata No. 1533/1, 1533/2 and 1533/3. The Gata No. 533/1 area 1-9-0 is recorded in the name of 'Kastkar' in the revenue record, Gata No. 1533/2 area 0-10-0 is recorded as 'Abadi' in the revenue record. The total area 1-19-0 of Gata No. 1533 exists as it was. In this way there is no manipulation done in khasra of 1359 fasli. There is no manipulation made in CH Akarpatra 41 and 45. The new Gata 1972 area 0.114 hectare (10 biswa) was prepared from old Gata No. 1533/2 and in the column of special comments, same is recorded as 'Abadi' and the same is also recorded as abadi in khata No. 682 of CH Form 45. The khata No. 833 category 6(2), the gata No. 1972 area 0.114 hectare is recorded as abadi. In view of the same it is clear that present gata 1972 was made from the old gata No. 1533/2.

4. It is further stated in paragraph 5 of the aforesaid affidavit that no manipulation whatsoever has been done in the khasra of the fasli year 1359 and no manipulation whatsoever has been done in the revenue record during the consolidation proceedings. A joint report in this regard was submitted by Tehsildar, Naib Tehsildar and Revenue Inspector dated 21.7.2018, which is appended as Annexure No. 1 to the aforesaid affidavits. The copy of the aforesaid affidavit was served upon the learned Counsel for the petitioners in the year 2018 but till date no rejoinder affidavit whatsoever has been filed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners disputed the joint report was submitted by the Tehsildar, Naib Tehsildar and Inspector dated 21.7.2018. It is argued by Sri S.C. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioners that still the encroachments are there and no enquiry whatsoever has been done in any proper manner in respect of revenue record.

6. In view of the same, learned Standing Counsel argued that after going through the record orders were already passed by the respondent No. 3, which does not call for any interference by this Court specially under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is further argued that in view of the order dated 30.5.2018 passed by this Court in the present writ petition a joint report has already been submitted by the authorities and according to the same there is absolutely no manipulation in the revenue record.

7. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. From perusal of the record, it is clear that after due enquiry orders were passed by the revenue authorities.

8. It is stated in paragraph 22 of the writ petition that the property in