Allegations of Land Scams and Institutional Apathy: The Case of Bihasara Khurd, Mirzapur

The integrity of land records is the bedrock of rural governance in India. However, when the very custodians of these records are accused of manipulation, the system transitions from a protector to a predator. A series of formal grievances filed by Ashok Kumar Maurya (Registration Numbers: GOVUP/E/2025/0021969 and GOVUP/E/2024/0034030) brings to light a disturbing narrative of alleged corruption, “muscle power,” and administrative collusion in Tehsil Sadar, District Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh.

At the heart of this dispute is Araji Number 164, a parcel of non-agricultural government land that has reportedly been subdivided, sold, and encroached upon under the watchful (or perhaps willfully blind) eyes of local revenue officials.

---

The Anatomy of a Land Mutation: From Government Property to Private Gain

The complainant’s allegations suggest a sophisticated “paper trail” manipulation. According to the grievance, the land in question underwent a series of identity changes—originally documented as Araji Number 175, then 183, then 191, and finally stabilized as Araji Number 164.

The most recent and critical transformation occurred when Araji 164 was bifurcated into 164 K (क) and 164 Kh (ख). This division, the complainant alleges, was not a routine administrative act but a fraudulent maneuver by the staff of Tehsil Sadar to facilitate the sale of government-owned land to private individuals.

The list of alleged beneficiaries includes several residents of Village Bihasara Khurd, characterized by the complainant as “muscle men” who wield local influence. This group includes individuals such as Ramraj, Hiramani, Anil Kumar, and others. The grievance asserts that these sales are fundamentally illegal, as the land in question is public property and should have been protected by the state.

---

The Human Cost: Encroachment and the Obstruction of Public Space

While the financial corruption is a matter for auditors and investigators, the physical consequences of this alleged scam are felt daily by the common villagers of Bihasara Khurd. The complainant highlights a critical “spillover” effect: the illegal occupiers are not content with the plots they allegedly purchased through corrupt means.

Key issues reported by the residents include:

• Encroachment on Public Roads: The illegal occupants have extended their boundaries beyond the disputed plots, encroaching onto the road.
• Obstruction of Commuters: Pedestrians and villagers are facing significant hurdles in movement, as the thoroughfare is being squeezed by illegal structures and boundaries.
• Atmosphere of Fear: The involvement of “muscle men” and their reported proximity to Tehsil staff has created a climate where common citizens feel silenced and vulnerable.

---

A “Parrot Report” Culture: The Failure of Grievance Redressal

One of the most stinging criticisms in the grievance is directed at the Lekhpal, Revenue Inspector, and Tehsildar of Sadar. The complainant describes their responses as “parrot reports”—standardized, repetitive, and dismissive statements that fail to address the core evidence provided.

In a previous grievance (GOVUP/E/2024/0034030), the local Lekhpal reportedly went as far as “advising” the complainant to file a civil suit in court. This has been interpreted by the villagers not as legal guidance, but as a tactical deflection. By telling a citizen to go to court, the revenue department effectively abdicates its administrative responsibility to protect government land, forcing the burden of proof and the cost of litigation onto the victim.

The complainant’s retort is sharp: “The custodians of this land are the officers… why should the citizen be forced into a suit when the state’s own property is being looted?”

---

Constitutional Duties and the Call for Accountability

The grievance invokes Article 51 A of the Constitution of India, which outlines the Fundamental Duties of citizens, including the duty to safeguard public property and to abjure violence. By reporting this matter, the applicant argues he is fulfilling his constitutional mandate, yet he finds himself pitted against a wall of institutional apathy.

The demand is clear: A transparent and accountable enquiry. The complainant argues that the current hierarchy in Mirzapur—from the District Magistrate (DM) and Chief Revenue Officer (CRO) down to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM)—must be held responsible for the “tyranny and arbitrariness” currently prevailing in Tehsil Sadar.

---

The Current Status: A Glimmer of Hope?

As of March 6, 2025, the grievance has been officially received by the Chief Minister’s Secretariat in Lucknow. It has been forwarded to Shri Arvind Mohan (Joint Secretary).

This escalation to the state capital is a significant step. It moves the matter out of the immediate influence of the Mirzapur Tehsil staff and places it under the scrutiny of the highest level of the Uttar Pradesh government. For the villagers of Bihasara Khurd, this represents a hope that the “anarchy” described in the grievance will finally be met with a “cogent approach.

Conclusion: Why This Matters

The case of Araji Number 164 is not just about a single village in Mirzapur. It is a microcosm of the challenges facing land governance in India. When government land is treated as a commodity for the powerful, the “common man” loses more than just a road; they lose faith in the rule of law.

If the government of Uttar Pradesh is serious about its “zero-tolerance” policy toward land mafias, the investigation into Tehsil Sadar must be rigorous, public, and swift. The documents are attached, the names are listed, and the villagers are watching.

To assist you in following up on your grievance regarding the alleged land irregularities in Village Bihasara Khurd, I have compiled the contact details and digital portals for the relevant authorities.

Given that your grievance (Registration Number: GOVUP/E/2025/0021969) has been forwarded to the Chief Minister’s Secretariat, these are the channels you can use for escalation and tracking.

---

1. State Level Authority (Current Handler)

Since your case is now with the Joint Secretary in Lucknow, these details are your primary point of contact for high-level intervention.

• Officer Name: Shri Arvind Mohan (Joint Secretary)
• Department: Chief Minister Secretariat, Uttar Pradesh
• Office Address: Room No. 321, U.P. Secretariat, Lucknow, PIN – 226001
• Phone Number: 0522-2226350
• Official Email: arvind.12574@gov.in
• Web Portal: Jansunwai-Samadhan (IGRS UP)

---

2. District Level Authorities (Mirzapur)

As your grievance names the District Magistrate and Tehsildar as parties who should be directed to safeguard the land, you may need to correspond with these offices directly:

Office	Designation	Official Web Link/Contact
District Magistrate (DM)	DM Mirzapur	mirzapur.nic.in
Chief Revenue Officer	CRO Mirzapur	Contact Directory
Tehsil Sadar	SDM/Tehsildar Sadar	Ph: 05442-252449 (Collectorate)

---

3. Digital Tracking & Application Details

To keep your records organized, ensure you use the following links to check live status updates:

• IGRS Status Link:Track Your Grievance
  • Input your Registration Number: GOVUP/E/2025/0021969
• CM Helpline: Dial 1076 (Toll-Free within Uttar Pradesh)
  • You can call this number to provide your Application ID and register a reminder if the “Date of Action” passes without a resolution.

---

4. Summary of Application Identifiers

Keep these details ready for any email or telephonic correspondence:

• Primary Application ID: GOVUP/E/2025/0021969 (Dated: 06/03/2025)
• Previous Reference ID: GOVUP/E/2024/0034030 (Dated: 06/06/2024)
• Subject Matter: Fraudulent bifurcation of Araji No. 164 and encroachment of public roads in Bihasara Khurd.

---

Next Steps for You

Caution: When emailing the Joint Secretary (arvind.12574@gov.in), ensure you attach the PDF evidence you mentioned in your grievance. Officials often rely on these attachments to verify if the “parrot reports” from the local Lekhpal are factually incorrect.

Would you like me to draft a formal follow-up email addressed to the Joint Secretary that specifically highlights the “parrot reports” and the violation of Article 51 A?