Allahabad High Court
WRIC/17625/2026 of VIJAI SHANKAR YADAV Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS on 5 May 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 17625 of 2026 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17625 of 2026
Court No. - 40
HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for the following relief:- "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to consider the application dated 01.04.2026 filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate order within the time to be specified by this Hon'ble Court."
3. It is alleged that private respondent nos.4 & 5 are attempting to encroach upon the land of petitioner, and petitioner in this respect has submitted a representation to the respondent-authority for redressal of the same. There is no allegation against the State-respondents that they are interfering with the possession of petitioner.
4. The dispute is essentially a private dispute between the petitioner and private respondents, who are attempting to encroach the land of petitioner.
5. The dispute between petitioner and private persons involves disputed question of fact as to whether petitioner's land has been encroached upon by private respondents which question cannot be decided by this Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as the said question can be adjudicated only on the basis of material and evidence on record.
6. It is also pertinent to note that this Court cannot issue a writ of mandamus Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar Chaudhary, Shashank Shekhar Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Vijai Shankar Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
against a private person under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy available under the law. May 6, 2026 Sattyarth WRIC No. 17625 of 2026 2 (Garima Prashad,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SATTYARTH ANAND High Court of Judicature at Allahabad