Allahabad High Court

RAM PRAVESH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS

Decided: 14 May 2026
Bench: ARUN KUMAR

Holding

The Court declined to grant mandamus and directed the revenue authority to resolve the pending partition matter under Section 32(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

Summary

Ram Pravesh Yadav filed a PIL seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State of U.P. and other respondents to remove an alleged illegal encroachment by private respondents on Plot No. 1661G (Bhita) in Village Adri, District Mau. The revenue authority had issued instructions showing that the plot is divided into three sub‑plots, with a pending partition case (Case No. D202615510000035) before the District Magistrate under Section 30(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The petitioner’s affidavit disputed the revenue report but did not deny that the plot is not a minzumla and that partition proceedings are ongoing. The Court held that it could not issue mandamus at this stage and instead directed the Collector/District Magistrate to decide the pending case under Section 32(2) of the Revenue Code within three months, and ordered the respondent to prevent future encroachment after the division is finalized.

Issues considered

Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel removal of encroachment when a partition proceeding under the U.P. Revenue Code is pending.
Whether the Court has jurisdiction to direct the revenue authority to decide the partition case under Section 32(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

Legislation cited

U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 30(2), 32(2)

Subjects

public interest litigation
mandamus
encroachment
revenue law
partition
minzumla
U.P. Revenue Code
land rights

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3927 of 2025

Ram Pravesh Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 9 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mukul Yadav, Rajesh Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla

Court No. - 55
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

1. Heard Sri Rajesh Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 4. Sri Rameshwar Prasad
Shukla has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 5.

2. The present petition has been filed for the following relief:

"a) Issue a writ, order of direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
respondent authorities to remove the illegal encroachment of private respondent No. 6
to 10 from the Gata No. 1661G, bearing area 0.1670 hectare which is recorded as
Bhita in the Revenue record, situated at Village Adri, Pargana Ghosi, Tehsil Maunath
Bhanjan, District Mau."

3. In pursuance of the direction of this Court, instructions dated
10.02.2026, sent by Tehsildar, Sadar, District Mau, has been placed
before the Court, which is taken on record.

4. A perusal of the aforesaid instructions shows that Plot No. 1661 is
divided into three sub-plots in which sub-plot no. 1661Ka, area 0.1010
hectare is recorded in the name of Pramod and others as bhumidhars; sub-
plot no. 1661Kha, area 0.0240 hectare is recorded as abadi; whereas sub-
plot no. 1661Ga, area 0.1670 hectare is recorded as Bhita. There is no
partition of the aforesaid minzumla numbers at present. Case No.
D202615510000035 has been registered before the District Magistrate,
Mau, under Section 30(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for the
partition of the minzumla number which is under consideration.
Immediately after division of the holding by metes and bounds plot no.
WPIL No. 3927 of 2025
2

1661Ga, area 0.1670 hectare, shall be restored as Bhita.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an affidavit of the petitioner
titled as Objection/Reply to the Instructions submitted by the revenue
authority disputing the correctness of the report, however, there is no
averment denying the fact that Plot No. 1661 is not a minzumla number
and the proceedings for division of the said plot is not pending.

6. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of with the
direction to the Collector/District Magistrate, Mau, to decide the aforesaid
case under Section 32(2) of the Revenue Code, pending before him, in
respect of Plot No. 1661, situated in Village Adri, Tehsil Maunath
Bhanjan, District Mau, in accordance with law, after hearing all the
concerned parties, within a period of three months, from the date of
presentation of a certified copy of this order.

7. The respondent no. 4 is further directed to ensure that once the division
of minzumla plot no. 1661 is finalized, effective steps shall be taken to
ensure that the public utility land is not encroached upon.

(Arun Kumar,J.)
May 15, 2026
Ranjeet Sahu

Digitally signed by :-
RANJEET SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…