Allahabad High Court

RAJESH KUMAR TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 6 May 2026
Bench: INDRAJEET SHUKLA AJIT KUMAR

Holding

The court held that the appropriate remedy was not a writ of mandamus but a direction to the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate to demarcate the disputed boundaries and to have the petitioner execute the sale deed after compensation.

Summary

The petitioner, owner of 0.018 hectare of plot No. 470 in Bhadohi district, filed a petition under Article 226 seeking a writ of mandamus to restrain the Public Works Department (PWD) from interfering with his possession. The State had already compensated the petitioner for a larger portion (0.071 hectare) of the same plot that is in PWD's possession for road laying. The court noted an overlapping boundary dispute between the two portions of the plot. It declined to issue mandamus and instead directed the petitioner to apply to the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate for a demarcation exercise within two weeks, with the magistrate to form a team to measure and fix pillars in the presence of both parties. The demarcation must be completed within two months, after which the petitioner, having accepted compensation, must execute a sale deed for the compensated land. The petition was therefore disposed with these directions.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus restraining the PWD department from interfering with his possession of the remaining 0.018 hectare of plot No. 470
Whether the court should direct the revenue authority to demarcate the boundaries of the disputed land

Subjects

Article 226
writ of mandamus
land demarcation
public works department
boundary dispute
compensation
property law

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 21115 of 2025

Rajesh Kumar Tiwari
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kamlesh Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 1
HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J.

1. Instruction placed today is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri
Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.K.
Shahi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State
respondents.

2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution,
petitioner, who is the owner and in possession of 0.0180 hectares of plot
No. - 470 situate at revenue village- Mauja Ugapur, Tehsil - Aurai,
District- Bhadohi, is aggrieved by the interference made by PWD
department and wants a writ in the nature of mandamus to restrain the
respondent from interfering in his possession.

4. Learned Standing Counsel has obtained instructions in the matter as per
which the land admeasuring 0.071 hectare of Plot No.- 470 was in
possession of the petitioner and compensation was paid.

5. A further instruction has been obtained to the effect that PWD
department is not interfering in the remaining area of land admeasuring
0.018 hectare falling in plot No.- 470.

6. From the above arguments and instructions as placed before the Court
by learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, it transpires that
some dispute of overlapping boundaries is there between two areas of the
WRIC No. 21115 of 2025
2

same plot, firstly admeasuring 0.071 hectares in possession of PWD
department for laying down road and 0.0180 hectare which still lies with
the petitioner.

7. In the circumstances, we dispose of this petition with a direction to the
petitioner to move application before the revenue authority, namely Sub -
Divisional Magistrate for demarcation of his area of land within two
weeks from today and if he does so, the Sub Divisional Magistrate shall
constitute a team to carry out measurement exercise to demarcate the
boundaries of two areas of the plot, firstly, in possession of the area of
PWD department and secondly, possession of the petitioner.

8. Demarcation exercise shall be carried out in presence of the both the
Petitioner as well as the officers of PWD and pillars shall be fixed
accordingly.

9. Entire exercise shall be carried out by Sub Divisional Magistrate within
two months of presentation of certified copy of this order along with
application as directed herein above.

10. It is further provided that since the petitioner admits to have accepted
compensation, he is directed to execute the sale deed of land in question
for which compensation has been obtained by the petitioner soon after the
demarcation exercise is completed.

(Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
May 7, 2026
Atmesh

Digitally signed by :-
ATMESH KESARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…