Court No. - 40

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 238 of 2023

Petitioner :- Dr. Shashikant Sharma And Another

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahesh Sharma,Gaurav

Kumar Shukla

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Kritika

Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the

respondent.

The present writ petition has been preferred with the

following reliefs:-

• "I). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of

mandamus directing the respondent to restore the

land of the petitioners including boundary wall in its

previous position which was demolished illegally by

the respondent nos.2 to 10 during pendency of the

O.S. No.1254 of 2021 (Apurva Nath Vs. Hariom and

others), pending before learned Civil Judge (Junior

Division), Basti.

• II). Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of

mandamus directing the respondent no.1 to take

disciplinary action respondent no.3, 5, 6, 7 & 8 who

have illegally demolished the boundry wall of the

petitioner and tried to change the nature of the land

without adopting any legal procedure, in collusion

with the respondent nos.9 & 10."

Ms. Kritika Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing

Counsel raised a preliminary objection with regard to

maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that

Original Suit No.1254 of 2021 (Apurva Nath Vs. Hariom

and others) is pending before learned Civil Judge (Junior

Division) in which petitioners are the defendant in which

on the injunction application notices have been issued. It

is also submitted that there is no demarcation of land as

has been provided as per the provision contained under

Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006, therefore,

disputed facts cannot be examined under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has very strenuously

advanced his submissions seeking indulgence of this

Court to interfere with the matter. However, he failed to

bag the discretion of this Court in petitioner's favour as

the premise on which the entire issue stands for does not

inspire confidence of this Court to look into the depth of

such civil dispute which bears complexity in facts and that

can only be redressed by filing a civil suit before the

appropriate court.

Confronted with the situation learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that he does not want to press the writ

petition, but certainly he will press the relief before the

concerned Court below.

In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as not

pressed.

Order Date :- 3.2.2023

Dev/-

Digitally signed by :-

DEV PRAKASH

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad