Allahabad High Court

MUKTI DEVI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 22 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK SARAN

Holding

The court declined to quash the notice and instead directed the petitioners to file a reply, maintaining the status‑quo pending a reasoned order.

Summary

The petitioners sought a writ of certiorari and mandamus to quash a notice dated 02‑07‑2026 issued under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code that threatened dispossession and demolition of their house on plot No. 1286. They relied on a settlement order dated 07‑01‑2004 confirming their title to the land. The State contended that the notice was merely procedural, that the petitioners could still file a reply, and that the writ petition was premature. The High Court directed the petitioners to submit a reply to the notice within 15 days and ordered the respondent to decide the matter within four weeks, maintaining the status‑quo in the meantime. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed without granting the relief sought.

Issues considered

Whether the notice issued under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code is illegal and liable to be set aside.
Whether the petitioners have a cause of action to invoke certiorari or mandamus at this stage.
Whether an interim status‑quo order is appropriate pending adjudication of the notice.

Legislation cited

U.P. Revenue Code — s. 67

Subjects

writ petition
certiorari
mandamus
U.P. Revenue Code
Section 67
land dispute
status quo
property rights
notice
settlement order

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 28905 of 2026

Mukti Devi And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sanjay Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sudhir Bharti

Court No. - 5
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.

1. Heard Sri Anirudh Singh holding brief of Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh,
learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the
State respondents and Sri Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for the
respondent no. 4.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following relief:-

"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari
quashing the impugned Notice dated 02.07.2026 (Annexure
No. 3 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent No.4
(Secretary, Land Management Committee, Village Puraina,
Khandi Chaura, Tehsil Sadar, District Mahrajganj) as well as
entire proceeding pursuant thereto against the petitioners.
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
MANDAMUS directing respondents/Authorities not to
proceed with the impugned notice dated 02.07.2026 (Annexure
No.3 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent No.4
(Secretary, Land Management Committee, Village Puraina,
Khandi Chaura, Tehsil Sadar, District Mahrajganj) and not to
dispossess and also not to demolish the house of the petitioners
over the land of plot No. 1286 having area 0.1940 Hectare
situated in Village Puraina, Khandi Chaura, Tehsil Sadar,
District Mahrajganj or may direct the parties to maintain status
quo."
WRIC No. 28905 of 2026
2

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that inspite of order dated
07.01.2004 wherein the State authorities have settled the alleged plot with
the petitioners since they were continuing since long and now without
taking note of the same, the impugned notice dated 02.07.2026 has been
issued under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, which proceeding is
illegal and is liable to be set aside.

4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel representing the State has
submitted that it may be the earlier order of 2004 have not been taken
note of but the petitioners are at liberty to give proper reply along with all
documents, as the order impugned is just a notice. The writ petition, as
such, is premature since there is no cause of action as on date.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the
record, it is clear that the petitioners are impugning the notice under
Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code and they are having right to object,
therefore, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners
to submit their reply to the said notice dated 02.07.2026 within a period of
15 days from today along with all supporting documents. In the event,
such a reply is submitted, the respondent no. 3 shall proceed to decide the
same within next four weeks, by passing a speaking and reasoned order.

6. As an interim measure, till such an order is passed, the status-quo as on
today, shall be maintained with respect to land in question.

(Vivek Saran,J.)
September 23, 2026
gp

Digitally signed by :-
GANESH PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…