Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SITA JAISWALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The Court held that the Gram Pradhan had no statutory authority to restrain the petitioner, and the dispute was a private matter not warranting writ intervention.

Summary

Petitioner Sita Jaiswal filed a writ petition seeking mandamus to restrain the Gram Pradhan of Harishankarpur and his associates from interfering with her construction on a parcel of land. She also requested the authorities to consider her claim filed on 16.02.2026. The High Court directed the respondent's counsel to clarify under what authority the Gram Pradhan was restraining the petitioner. The respondent's counsel submitted that the matter was a private dispute and the Gram Pradhan was not interfering with the petitioner’s possession or construction. Accepting this submission, the Court found no basis for further intervention and disposed of the writ petition, indicating that any future obstruction could be remedied through appropriate legal means.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate jurisdiction of the High Court to issue a writ of mandamus in a private land dispute involving a Gram Pradhan?
  • Whether the Gram Pradhan has any statutory authority to restrain the petitioner’s construction activities on her land.

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • mandamus
  • private dispute
  • Gram Panchayat
  • construction
  • land
  • restraining order

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                          WRIT - C No. - 11904 of 2026

Sita Jaiswal
                                                                   .....Petitioner(s)
                                      Versus

State Of U.P. And 4 Others
                                                                 .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)             : Prashant Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s)             : Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, C.S.C.

Court No. - 40
                   HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
                   HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for
the State and Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the
respondent No.5/Gram Pradhan.

2. Petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for the
following reliefs:

     "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
     the Respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 to restrain the respondent no. 5, Gram
     Pradhan of Gram Panchayat -Harishankarpur and his associates in any
     manner interference in the construction of petitioner over the land gata
     no.250/7 area 0.0650 hectare situated at Mauja-Harishankarpur, Pargana-
     Ralhupur, Tehsil- Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyay Nagar, District-Chandauli,
     so that justice may be done.

     (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
     the Respondent no. 2 & 3 to consider and decide the claim of petitioner
     contained in representation dated 16.02.2026 for being restrained the
     respondent no. 5, Gram Pradhan of Gram Panchayat - Harishankarpur and
     his associates in any manner interference in the Construction of petitioner
     over the land gata no.250/7 area 0.0650 hectare situated at Mauja-
     Harishankarpur, Pargana-Ralhupur, Tehsil- Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyay
     Nagar, District-Chandauli, so that justice may be done."

3. On 6.4.2026, this Court passed the following order:
                                                                                                       WRIC No. 11904 of 2026
                                                                            2


                                              "1. Sri Pradeep Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Bhupendra Kumar
                                              Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents is directed to seek
                                              instructions in the matter and apprise the Court as to under what authority,
                                              the Gram Pradhan is restraining the petitioner from raising construction
                                              over her land.

                                              2. Put up as fresh on 07.05.2026."

                                    4. Sri Tripathi, learned counsel for the Gram Pradhan, on instructions,
                                    states that the dispute is essentially a private dispute and the Gram
                                    Pradhan is neither interfering with the possession of the petitioner nor
                                    restraining her from raising any construction.

                                    5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Gram
                                    Pradhan, no further order is required to be passed.

                                    6. The writ petition is disposed of.

                                    7. In case, the Gram Pradhan creates any obstruction in future in raising
                                    the construction by petitioner, she may seek appropriate remedy available
                                    in law.



                                                                           (Garima Prashad,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)
                                    May 7, 2026
                                    Kuldeep




Digitally signed by :-
KULDEEP SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.