Allowed

Committee of Management Sri Nath Baba Education Soc. Thru. Its Manager Awadhesh Singh and Another v. Board of Revenue, U.P. Lko. Thru. Its Chairman and Others

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2023/3637/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Writ Petition challenged an order where the Board of Revenue Registry refused to register a revision petition against an order expunging land entries. The Court held that Registries lack the authority to determine maintainability. It set aside the non-registration order, directing the Registry to number the petition for consideration by the Authority.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 31.05.2022 refusing registration is set aside. The Registry is directed to number the revision and file it before the Board of Revenue.

Committee of Management Sri Nath… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:44982

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3637 of 2022

¶4

Petitioner :- Committee Of Management Sri Nath Baba Education Soc. Thru. Its Manager Awadhesh Singh And Another Respondent :- Board Of Revenue, U.P. Lko. Thru. Its Chairman And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahendra Bahadur Singh,Vikas Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Mahendra Bahadur Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned State counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶7

By means of this petition, a challenge has been made to the order dated 31.05.2022, whereby, the registry of respondent No. 1/Board of Revenue at Lucknow refused to register the revision preferred by the petitioners under Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (in short "Code of 2006"), which was filed challenging the order dated 10.05.2022 passed by the respondent No. 3/District Magistrate, Ballia, whereby, the entries of land recorded in the name of petitioner/Society have been ordered to be expunged/cancelled.

¶8

Assailing the order dated 31.05.2022, the submission of Sri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate is to the effect that the Registry can make a note with regard to maintainability of the proceedings which in this case is the revision preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 10.05.2022 and Registry of Authority or Court, as the case may be, cannot refuse to register the case. The issue of maintainability can only be decided by the Authority or the Court, as the case may be. In this view of the matter, indulgence of this Court is required.

¶9

He further stated that in the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the Case of P. Surendran vs. State By Inspector of Police reported in (2019) 9 SCC 154 , wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court after considering the issue of rejection of anticipatory bail application by the Registry of Hon'ble High Court of Madras observed that the Registry cannot refuse to register the Anticipatory Bail Application on the ground of its

¶10

maintainability and it has also been observed in the said judgment that the issue of maintainability has to be decided by the Court concerned. In this view of the matter, the interference of this Court is required in the matter. The relevant para 11, referred, reads as under:-

¶11

" 11. Therefore, we hold that the High Court Registry could not have exercised such judicial power to answer the maintainability of the petition, when the same was in the realm of the Court. As the power of judicial function cannot be delegated to the Registry, we cannot sustain the order, rejecting the numbering/registration of the petition, by the Madras High Court Registry. Accordingly, the Madras High Court Registry is directed to number the petition and place it before an appropriate Bench."

¶12

The aforesaid is not in dispute.

¶13

Taking note of the aforesaid, this Court is of the view that the matter requires interference. Accordingly, the order dated 31.05.2022 passed by the Registry of respondent No. 1/Board of Revenue at Lucknow is hereby set-aside. The Registry/Office of respondent No. 1 is directed to number the revision and place the same before the respondent No. 1, who first shall consider the issue/note of the Registry with regard to maintainability of revision filed by the petitioners assailing the order dated 10.05.2022 and thereafter, proceed in the matter.

¶14

The petition is allowed in above terms.

¶15

Order Date :- 12.7.2023 Arun/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Committee of Management Sri Nath Baba Education Soc. Thru. Its Manager Awadhesh Singh and Another v. Board of Revenue, U.P. Lko. Thru. Its Chairman and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Committee of Management Sri Nath Baba Education Soc. Thru. Its Manager Awadhesh Singh and Another v. Board of Revenue, U.P. Lko. Thru. Its Chairman and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Jatan and Others Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Faizabad

Janak Dulari and Others Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Unnao and Another

Smt Bifai Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Faizabad and Others

Amrawati Vs Tehsildar Judicaial, Tehsil Bikapur, Ayodhya and 3 Others

Khalilullah Alias Khaleel Ullah Siddiqui Vs Addl.Commissioner (Judicial) Faizabad and 6 Others

Sant Ram and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. and Others