SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(All) 381

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
Sangeeta Chandra, Amitabh Kumar Rai, JJ.
Sufiyakhatoon and another - Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Deptt. Lko.and others - Respondents
WRIT - C No. - 9806 of 2024
Decided On : 10-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mohd. Hayan Hasan, Mohd.altaf Mansoor
For the Respondent: C.S.C., Ram Kumar Singh

Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot resolve disputed title and possession over land; civil suit is appropriate remedy. Section 23(1)(a) of U.P. Zamindari Act bars recognition of post-1948 transfers only for rehabilitation grant, not rendering them void.

Headnote:(A) U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Sections 4, 9, 23, 117 - Post-01.07.1948 transfer by sale not void under Section 23(1)(a); non-recognition limited to assessing rehabilitation grant payable to intermediary - Distinction between void transaction and bar on recognition. (Paras 25-31)

(B) U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 - Sections 5, 116; U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 - Section 8 - Executive Officer to decide objections to encroachment notice per court directions, but findings on title not binding on civil court. (Paras 21-23)

(C) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ jurisdiction inappropriate for disputed questions of title and possession; civil suit proper remedy - No interference despite erroneous reasoning on Section 23 where claim unsupported by cogent evidence. (Paras 39-46)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners claimed ownership of abadi land via sale receipt from estate holder, alleging 74 years possession and tax payments; treated as encroachment by local body recorded as their abadi land in revenue records. Notices issued, eviction ordered, prior order quashed for natural justice breach, fresh order rejected claim holding vesting in local body.

Findings of Court:
Reasoning on Section 23 erroneous as transfer valid; however, title unsupported (receipt not deed, no revenue corroboration, recent temporary encroachments), possession disputed; issues not adjudicable in writ.

Issues: Executive Officer's jurisdiction to decide title; applicability of Sections 4/23 to abadi land; validity of dispossession and restoration claim based on possession.

Ratio Decidendi: Writ court cannot examine disputed title/possession facts; Executive Officer's title findings per directions not assuming civil court role but not conclusive; civil suit required, no opinion on merits. Result : Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners' ownership claim via 1950 receipt; eviction history. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 14 , 15)
2. abadi land vested in panchayat; temporary encroachments removed. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
3. post-1948 transfer invalid; tax payment no title conferral. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
4. eo must consider objections but cannot adjudicate title. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
5. section 23 does not void post-1948 land transfers. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31)
6. abadi land title disputed; insufficient evidence of possession. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38)
7. writ court cannot resolve disputed title and possession. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45)
8. writ dismissed; pursue civil suit for title. (Para 46 , 47 , 48)

JUDGMENT :

Amitabh Kumar Rai, J.

1. Heard Shri Sudeep Seth, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Mohd. Hayan Hasan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Ram Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Nagar Panchayat and Shri Prakhar Mishra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Respondent.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following main prayers :

"(i) To issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 6.8.2024 passed by the opposite party no.5/ Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Belhara, District Barabanki contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition.

(ii) To issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents especially the officials respondents no.2,3,4,5 and 8 to restore the possession of the land in question bearing Gata No.807 (old Gata no.1023) in favour of the petitioners and further not to change nature of property or make any kind of construction on the petitioners land in question Gata No.807 (old Gata no.1023), and further direct them to remove the board which has been affixed on the land of the petitioner, during the pendency of the present writ petition.

(iii) To issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents especially the officials respondents not to cancel/delete the name of the petitioners from the records of Nagar Panchayat and restrain the opp. parties from entering the land in the name of Nagar Panchayat/local bodies."

3. It is the case of the petitioners that the father-in-law of the petitioners, namely, Late Shri Abdul Sattar Khan, purchased the land bearing Gata No. 807 (old Gata No.1023), measuring 6,695 sq. ft., from Mrs. Rani Kanij Abid of Riyasat Belhara situated at Bakariya Tola, Ward No.03, Belhara, District Barabanki through a sale receipt dated 31.08.1950. Ever since the said purchase, the petitioners and their family members have been in peaceful and continuous possession of the aforesaid land.

4. It has been submitted that respondent No.5, the Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Belhara, District Barabanki issued two notices dated 29.04.2024 to both petitioners, calling upon them to submit documentary evidence in support of their ownership of the aforesaid land within a period of fifteen days alleging therein that the petitioners, on the basis of incorrect information during the course of the survey, got the land in question registered in the register of house tax/water tax.

5. In response thereto, the petitioners submitted a detailed reply dated 10.05.2024 asserting that the land in question had been purchased by their father-in-law and that they are the lawful owners thereof. Along with the said reply, documents relating to title and possession were annexed and several other grounds were also raised opposing the proposed action contemplated under the said notices.

6. Despite the aforesaid reply, respondent no.5, the Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Belhara, District Barabanki issued eviction order dated 13.06.2024 directing dispossession/eviction of both the petitioners, requiring them to remove the alleged encroachments from Gata No.807 within three days from the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top