Allahabad High Court
SHYAMLALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK SARAN
Holding
The High Court held that factual disputes cannot be decided under Article 226 and dismissed the writ petition.
Summary
Shyamlal filed a writ petition under Article 226 against the State of U.P. and others, challenging the inspection of certain land parcels (Gata Nos. 116, 132, 136) by a revenue team appointed by the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate. The State submitted written instructions indicating that Gata No. 116 was submerged and could not be inspected, and that Gata No. 132, being within the abadi area, could not have boundaries demarcated. The petitioner contested these factual findings. The Court observed that the dispute centered on factual matters, which are not within the jurisdiction of a writ under Article 226. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the Court directing the petitioner to seek appropriate legal remedy elsewhere.
Issues considered
- Can a factual dispute regarding land inspection be decided by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution?
Subjects
- Article 226
- writ petition
- factual dispute
- land inspection
- jurisdiction
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 22678 of 2026
Shyamlal
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Santosh Kumar Mishra, Vinay Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. Pursuant to the earlier order of this Court, learned Standing Counsel has furnished
written instructions dated 07.09.2026 under the signatures of Sub-Divisional
Magistrate, Deoria, the same are taken on record.
3. On the strength of the said written instructions, learned Standing Counsel has stated
that during the pendency of the instant writ petition a team of various revenue officers
was constituted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate concerned vide order dated
14.08.2026. He further submits that the said team had inspected the Gata Nos.116, 132
and 136 and since the land of Gata No.116 was submerged, thus the same could not be
inspected. Thereafter, as the Gata No.132 Mi ad measuring 0.008 hectares falls within
the abadi area, therefore no boundaries could be made.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner have dispute the above facts.
5. Since the petitioner disputes the factual aspect of the matter, this Court is of the
considered opinion that the disputed question of facts can not be decided under Article
226 of the Constitution of India.
6. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail
the remedy as available under law.
September 23, 2026
Deepika
(Vivek Saran,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
DEEPIKA SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…