Supreme Court Remands Land-Dispute Matter To High Court For Fresh Fact-Finding; Orders Satellite Imagery If Needed

A Bench of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar heard appeals arising out of special leave petitions challenging a Division Bench judgment in a writ petition concerning possession and alleged acquisition of a small parcel of land in Sonbhadra district, Uttar Pradesh. The appeals questioned whether the district administration was in possession of 3 biswa of land belonging to the petitioner and whether a road had been constructed on that land without payment of compensation.

The Court set aside the impugned High Court order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration on factual grounds. The Bench observed that the High Court's judgment "proceeds on the basis of contradictory stands taken by the district administration but does not deal with the factual issue in question." The Court noted that "departmental proceedings have been initiated against the erring officer(s)." The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "In view of the aforesaid discussion, we set aside the impugned judgment and pass an order of remand to the High Court to decide afresh Writ-C No. 16762/2017, titled 'Heera Lal v. State of U.P. & Ors.'. Whilst deciding the matter, the High Court may call upon the parties to file additional affidavits and may also require the District/State authorities to file satellite images to establish the factual position." The Bench also clarified that it had "not commented on the merits of the case" and directed the High Court to decide the writ petition independently.

Background The dispute arose from ownership and possession of Plot No. 606/2 in Village Sukrit, Pargana Ahraura, Tehsil Chunar, District Sonbhadra. Respondent No.1, Heera Lal, claimed title over 8 biswa originally, having sold portions to two persons and remaining owner of 3 biswa. He alleged that the district administration took possession of 4 biswa for construction of a road and that no compensation had been paid; he further stated that a Site Inspection and Demarcation Report dated 15.11.2018 recorded that the area of vacant land on the side of Varanasi–Shaktinagar "can be taken by Heera Lal", but that he had not been given possession. The appellants (district administration) did not dispute Heera Lal’s ownership of 3 biswa but there were conflicting statements on possession and use of the land.

The High Court had entertained Writ-C No. 16762/2017 (Heera Lal v. State of U.P. & Ors.) and issued an order dated 30.08.2018 which the Supreme Court found to be premised on contradictory stands by the administration and deficient on the central factual question whether the appellants were in possession of the 3 biswa and had constructed a road thereon. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned judgment and a subsequent review order dated 26.07.2024, and remitted the writ petition for fresh adjudication. The Court invited the High Court to call for additional affidavits and, if necessary, to require the District/State authorities to file satellite images to establish the factual position. The Supreme Court disposed of pending applications and expressly refrained from pronouncing on the merits, leaving that determination to the High Court.

Case No.: 2025 INSC 285 (arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 25463-25464/2024) Case Title: District Magistrate/Collector, Sonbhadra & Anr. v. Heera Lal & Ors. Appearances: (List advocates if available, for both sides using the format) For the Petitioner(s): Counsel for the appellants not named in the order For the Respondent(s): Counsel for respondent No.1, Heera Lal, referred to in hearings but not named in the order; other respondents' counsel not specified in the order