Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

RASHID ALIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The petitioner failed to prove encroachment and the writ petition was disposed.

Summary

The petitioner, Rashid Ali, filed a writ petition alleging that he had not encroached upon the adjacent chak road. The court noted that the petitioner had not taken any steps to demarcate his land, which was essential to establish the claim. Consequently, the court found no evidence of encroachment and disposed of the petition. The court directed that if the petitioner later files an application for demarcation, it should be decided expeditiously. It also warned that any execution proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, must involve careful verification of the alleged encroached area. The petition was therefore dismissed without any order of relief.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner has encroached upon the adjacent chak road
  • Whether the petitioner is required to demarcate his land to substantiate his claim

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • land encroachment
  • demarcation
  • U.P. Revenue Code
  • Section 67
  • writ petition
  • execution proceedings

Judgment

                                               HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                           WRIT - C No. - 39221 of 2025

                                    Rashid Ali
                                                                                              .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                      Versus

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

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)      : K.C. Mishra
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)      : Azad Rai, C.S.C., Pramod Kumar
                                                                     Srivastava

                                    Court No. - 32
                                                 HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

                                    1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for
                                    respondents.

                                    2. Petitioner is claiming that he has not encroached adjacent "chak road",
                                    however, till date he has not taken any steps to demarcate his land.

                                    3. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of with an observation
                                    that in case petitioner moves an application for demarcation, the same be
                                    decided expeditiously.

                                    4. Meanwhile, in case execution proceedings is initiated to execute orders
                                    passed u/s 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, concerned respondent will
                                    carefully verify area of encroachment.



                                                                               (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    N. Sinha




Digitally signed by :-
NIRMAL SINHA
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.