Allahabad High Court Upholds Eviction Order for Mosque on Gram Sabha Land in Lucknow
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has declined to intervene in an eviction order issued by the district administration concerning an alleged 60-year-old mosque constructed on gram sabha land in the Bakshi-ka-Talab (BKT) area. However, in a significant relief to the petitioners, the bench has set aside the imposition of a Rs 36,000 fine, noting they had no role in the mosque's construction on the disputed property, which is officially registered as a barn in revenue records.
Legal Proceedings and Petitioners' Arguments
A single bench presided over by Justice Alok Mathur delivered this order in response to a petition filed by Shahban and others. The petitioners had challenged two key administrative decisions: an eviction order passed by the tehsildar on February 28, 2025, and the subsequent dismissal of their appeal by the additional district magistrate (judicial) on October 31, 2025.
In their legal challenge, the petitioners presented several critical arguments to support their case. They asserted that the mosque was constructed approximately six decades ago by the local Muslim community, emphasizing that this was not a recent encroachment but a long-standing structure. Furthermore, the petitioners clarified that they only visit the mosque for prayers and have no involvement in its management or administration.
The petitioners also raised serious procedural concerns regarding the trial process. They argued that they were denied the fundamental legal right to cross-examine witnesses, which they claimed rendered the orders issued by the tehsildar and the additional district magistrate unsustainable under the law.
State's Opposition and Court's Findings
The state counsel strongly opposed the petitioners' pleas, presenting a counter-argument based on official land records. According to the state, the land in question, identified as khata No. 648 in Asti village under BKT tehsil, is clearly recorded as barn land in the revenue records and is legally classified as the property of the gram sabha. The state contended that the mosque was constructed on this land through illegal occupation, thereby justifying the eviction order.
After a thorough hearing of the matter, the bench carefully examined the evidence and legal submissions from both sides. The court found that the land indisputably belonged to the gram sabha, as established by the revenue records. Crucially, the bench noted that the petitioners failed to demonstrate any legal right, ownership, or legitimate interest in the property. This lack of established legal claim was a pivotal factor in the court's decision to uphold the eviction order.
However, the court showed judicial discretion by setting aside the Rs 36,000 fine imposed on the petitioners. The bench reasoned that since the petitioners were not involved in the original construction of the mosque, penalizing them financially was unjust. This aspect of the ruling highlights the court's nuanced approach, balancing strict adherence to property laws with considerations of individual circumstances.
The case underscores ongoing legal complexities surrounding land use and religious structures in India, particularly when historical constructions intersect with contemporary property regulations. The court's decision reinforces the principle that gram sabha lands are protected community assets, while also acknowledging the need for fair procedural treatment of individuals involved in such disputes.
