Allahabad High Court
RAMJI @ RAMJEETversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
A writ of mandamus cannot be issued to compel the magistrate to re‑demarcate land where the dispute is between private parties; the petition is not maintainable.
Summary
Ramji filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate of Jaunpur to re‑demarcate a 0.023‑hectare parcel of his land, alleging that although demarcation and boundary pillars had been installed, a dispute with private respondents required the proceedings to be reopened. The petitioner argued that without a hearing of the private parties, he would suffer irreparable loss. The Court held that the petitioner cannot compel the hearing of private respondents through a writ and that the grievance is a civil dispute, not within the jurisdiction of a writ petition. Consequently, the petition was deemed wholly misconceived and not maintainable. The Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to pursue the appropriate legal remedy under the law.
Issues considered
- Can a writ of mandamus be issued to compel a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate to re‑demarcate land when the dispute is between private parties?
- Is a writ petition maintainable when the grievance pertains to a private civil dispute?
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- land demarcation
- jurisdiction
- private dispute
- maintainability
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17373 of 2026
Ramji @ Ramjeet
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 6 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Santosh Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, C.S.C.
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. This petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
"(I) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondent No.3/ Sub Divisional Magistrate Tehsil-Sadar, District-
Jaunpur to redemarcate the area of Gata No. 142/0.023 hectare of the
petitioner, situated at Village- Umarpur, Pargana - Rari, Tehsil-Sadar,
District -Jaunpur, otherwise petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and
injury.
(II). Issue, any other writ, order or direction under the facts and
circumstances of the case which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that application for
demarcation filed by the petitioner was allowed and the boundary pillars
have been installed. Petitioner has also constructed his wall. Now, the
petitioner states that he has dispute with the private respondents, for that
purpose, he prays that he has made a representation that the proceedings
may be recommenced and the same shall be decided after hearing the
other side.
3. The petitioner cannot compel any other person to be heard unless he
has so desired and therefore, the writ petition is wholly misconceived.
Further, the dispute of the petitioner is with the private respondents for
which the writ petition is not maintainable.
WRIC No. 17373 of 2026
2
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the
petitioner to avail the remedy as available to him under the law.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
May 5, 2026
Nitika Sri.
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…