The analysis reveals several key takeaways. It involves the land dispute grievance with the Jigna Police Station. The complainant in this case is Kamlesh Singh. Adjudication is pending in this case.

1. Violation of the “Status Quo”

The primary issue is the failure of local authorities to maintain the status quo while the matter is sub-judice. Despite active litigation in the Magistrate and Civil Courts, the police allegedly permitted the opposing party to proceed with construction. They allowed fencing, effectively changing the ground reality before a judicial verdict.

2. Confirmed Financial Fraud (Stamp Theft)

The Department of Registry’s official findings bolster the grievance. The sellers and purchasers committed stamp duty theft, amounting to approximately ₹2,74,000 (Cases D202316530000370 and D2023165000370). The complainant argues that the state should not grant administrative protection. These parties are guilty of defrauding it. They are occupying disputed land.

3. Alleged Administrative Anarchy (Adjudication is pending)

The complainant highlights a breakdown in the “Right to Reason,” accusing the Jigna Police and the Circle Officer of Lalganj of:

• Providing inconsistent and arbitrary reports.
• Failing to explain the legal basis for allowing construction to continue.
• Prematurely assuming that the mutation process (transfer of title in revenue records) was complete despite the pending court cases.

4. Failure of the Grievance Redressal Mechanism

The grievance (GOVUP/E/2025/0064331) receives a “Closed” status, which critiques the Jansunwai portal’s intent. Critics accuse the administration of prioritizing “disposal numbers” over actual justice. This accusation arises from the administration’s decision to close the case. They did so based on a police report that ignores the merits of the legal dispute.

---

Summary Table: Legal vs. Actual Situation

Feature	Legal Requirement	Actual Situation Reported
Possession	Requires completed mutation and no court stay.	Forcible possession via “muscle power.”
Police Role	Neutral enforcement of court-ordered status quo.	Alleged bias/inaction toward construction.
State Revenue	Full payment of stamp duty for valid registry.	Documented theft/under-valuation.

Adjudication is pending: When Land Disputes, Stamp Theft, and Police Inaction Collide

The sanctity of the legal process relies on a simple principle. While a court decides the fate of a property, no one should alter the ground reality by force. This captures the essence of Status Quo. In cases where adjudication is pending, maintaining the original state of affairs becomes crucial. A recent grievance (Registration No: GOVUP/E/2025/0064331) from Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, highlights a troubling disconnect. It demonstrates a gap between judicial proceedings and administrative enforcement.

A volatile mix of alleged ancestral property encroachment and substantial stamp duty evasion lies at the heart of this matter. Adjudication is pending. Critics accuse the police department of looking the other way while “muscle power” dictates the outcome.

The Genesis of the Dispute: Ancestral Claims and Questionable Sales

The conflict began in the Jigna police circle of Mirzapur. The complainant, Kamlesh Singh, alleges that Raghuvar Dayal Singh sold ancestral property to his own family members. Specifically, the property went to his son-in-law and daughter-in-law. Adjudication is pending.

The crux of the legal argument is two-fold:

1. Pending Adjudication: The parties currently challenge the validity of these land transfers. They have brought the case to the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) Sadar. They also challenge it in the Civil Court.
2. Premature Possession: Under Uttar Pradesh revenue laws, a purchaser typically cannot claim absolute possession. The purchaser also cannot alter the land’s character until they finalize mutation proceedings (updating the revenue records). This is especially true when the judicial system scrutinizes the sale itself.

The Allegation of Stamp Duty Theft

One of the most striking elements of this case is the confirmed “theft of stamp duty.” In India, stamp duty is a vital source of state revenue. Under-valuing a property to pay less tax is a criminal offense against the state.

The Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Mirzapur, confirmed the complainant’s suspicions through an investigation. The investigation recorded two specific cases: D202316530000370 and D2023165000370, which involved a total recovery of approximately ₹2,74,000.

“Purchasers who have defrauded the state of its revenue cannot be granted the moral or legal high ground. They cannot forcibly occupy land while the courts are still weighing the merits of the deed.”

The Role of the Jigna Police: Protection or Participation?

The most urgent part of the grievance concerns the Station House Officer (SHO) of Jigna, who the complainant accuses of allowing the opposing party to surround the disputed site with wire and stones, despite the SHO initially assuring that they would halt construction. Adjudication is pending.

The Right to Reason

A fundamental pillar of administrative law is the Right to Reason. A citizen may question the police when they permit a party to build on disputed land. The police must then provide a legal basis.

• Did a competent court vacate the stay?
• Is there a formal order for police protection for the construction?

In this case, the complainant argues that the police reached a premature conclusion regarding the completion of the land mutation. This action effectively bypassed the Revenue Court’s authority.

The “Closed” Grievance: A Failure of Oversight?

There were detailed allegations of stamp theft and illegal construction. However, the grievance was marked as “Case Closed” on July 11, 2025. The remarks simply stated that an “inquiry report is attached.”

This “arbitrary closing” of files is a common frustration for citizens using portals like Jansunwai. An official, such as the Circle Officer of Lalganj, submits a report that ignores the “merit of the grievance” and notes that adjudication is pending. As a result, it fuels citizen frustration. Furthermore, when such reports fail to address the pending litigation, it undermines the state’s goal of Good Governance.

Key Discrepancies in the Administrative Response:

Point of Contention	Complainant’s Position	Administrative Action
Legal Status	Matter is sub-judice (pending in court).	Reported as “disposed” or “not related.”
Stamp Duty	Confirmed theft of ₹2.74 Lakhs.	Acknowledged but not linked to possession rights.
Possession	Illegal construction using muscle power.	Allowed to continue under police watch.

The Human Cost of “Muscle Power” in case Adjudication is pending

When the police fail to maintain the status quo, it sets a dangerous precedent. It signals that whoever has the most influence—or the fastest bricks—wins, regardless of what the Magistrate eventually decides. The complainant alleges that his rightful share of the land is being swallowed up by these unauthorized constructions. Adjudication is pending.

For a farmer or a rural resident, land is not just an asset; it is a livelihood. When the administrative machinery favours the “wrongdoer,” it provides a “story” instead of a legal solution. As a result, the citizen’s faith in the rule of law erodes.

Conclusion: The Path Forward (Adjudication is pending)

The grievance against the Joint Secretary and the Mirzapur police isn’t just about a plot of land. It is about the accountability of the station house. To resolve this fairly, the following must occur:

1. Verification of Mutation: The police must provide the specific date. They also need to provide the order number under which they claim the mutation was completed.
2. Enforcement of Status Quo: The SDM or Civil Court must rule on the validity of the sale deeds first. Until then, all construction should be halted. This would prevent “irreparable injury” to the complainant.
3. Review of the Inquiry: The arbitrary report submitted by the Circle Officer should be reviewed by an independent body. This would ensure it wasn’t biased toward the offenders.

The state is striving for “Zero Tolerance” toward land mafias and anarchy. The Jigna Police Station’s actions require a closer look from the Chief Minister’s Secretariat.

To assist with your follow-up on Grievance No. GOVUP/E/2025/0064331, I have compiled the official contact details for the relevant authorities. These are the specific offices responsible for oversight, law enforcement, and registration in Mirzapur and the State Secretariat.

---

1. State Level Oversight (Chief Minister’s Secretariat)

Since your grievance was addressed to the Joint Secretary at the CM Office, these are the primary escalation points.

• Concerned Officer: Shri Arvind Mohan (Joint Secretary / Web Information Manager)
• Office Address: Room No. 321, 3rd Floor, Lok Bhawan, U.P. Secretariat, Lucknow – 226001
• Email: arvind.12574@gov.in / jansunwai-up@gov.in
• Phone (Office): 0522-2226350 / 0522-2215137
• CM Helpline: 1076 (Direct line for grievance status)

---

2. District Administration & Revenue (Mirzapur)

These officials have the authority to review the “stamp theft” cases and the disputed land mutation process.

Designation	Name	Email	Phone / CUG
District Magistrate (DM)	Shri Pawan Kumar Gangwar (IAS)	dmmir@nic.in	9454417567
ADM (Finance & Revenue)	Shri Ajai Kumar Singh	admfr.mi-up@gov.in	9454417638
AIG Registration	(Mirzapur Office)	igrsup@nic.in (General)	05442-252204
SDM Sadar	(Concerned Revenue Court)	sdm-sadar.mi@up.gov.in	Contact via DM Office

---

3. Police Administration (Mirzapur) (Adjudication is pending)

For complaints regarding the “anarchy” at the Jigna Police Station and the failure to maintain the status quo, adjudication is pending.

• DIG/SSP Mirzapur: Shri Somen Barma (IPS)
  • Email: spmzr-up@nic.in
  • CUG Mobile: 9454400299
• Circle Officer (CO) Lalganj: (The officer who submitted the report)
  • Email: co-lalganj.mi@up.gov.in
  • CUG Mobile: 9454401592
• Jigna Police Station:
  • CUG Mobile (SHO): 9454403982 (Standard CUG for SHO Jigna)

---

4. Digital Portals for Appeals

If you wish to challenge the “Closed” status or the report of the Circle Officer, use these official links:

• Jansunwai (IGRS) Portal:jansunwai.up.nic.in
  • Note: Use the “Send Reminder” or “Feedback” option on your existing ID to mark your dissatisfaction.
• Stamps & Registration Department:igrsup.gov.in
  • Use this to track the recovery status of Case Nos. D202316530000370 and D2023165000370.

---

Recommended Next Step

To ensure your dissatisfaction is formally recorded, you should send a signed PDF letter to the DM Mirzapur (dmmir@nic.in) and CC the DIG Mirzapur (spmzr-up@nic.in).