The Single Judge dismissed this writ petition following the precedent set in Writ B No.2652 of 2022. The petitioner's prayer for reliance on the earlier order was granted, and the case was disposed of by following that specific precedent.
Impugned order set aside; writ petition disposed of in terms of order dated 26.09.2023 in Writ B No.2652 of 2022.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:238564
Court No. - 48
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1288 of 2023
Petitioner :- Rameshpal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for petitioner fairly submits that this writ petition can be disposed of in terms of judgment passed by this Court in the case of Writ B No.2652 of 2022 vide order dated 26.09.2023.
Learned Standing Counsel for State has no objection if such prayer is allowed.
Considering the above submission, impugned order is set aside and this writ petition is disposed of in terms of following order dated 26.09.2023 passed in Writ B No.2652 of 2022 (Ram Prakash and 4 others Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2023:AHC: 186828) and other connected writ petitions :-
"1. Heard Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, Sri Mahesh Sharma and Sri Raja Ullah Khan, Advocates for petitioners in the writ petitions, Sri Sharad Chand Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-Respondents and Sri Sher Bahadur Singh, Advocate for Gaon Sabha.
2. This bunch of writ petitions are pertaining to three villages, namely, Chachuapur, Dhiraula and Juhi Jadeed of District Shahjahanpur and relevant documents are also difference in bunch of cases.
3. Petitioners' case is mainly rests on the ground that they were recorded as tenure holders in basic year Khatauni whereas the case of State is that there was no basis for such entry since there are documents available with State that in previous years, names of petitioners were not on record.
4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for State has produced original record of above villages in support of their contention which are very old.
5. It has not been denied that such documents have not been controverted by petitioners, i.e., petitioners were not granted opportunity to submit their averments on said documents. Revisional Authority has mixed the cases of three villages and relying upon a report, mainly of one village, has decided the cases which appears to be not a correct approach. Petitioners have right
to confront the case of respondents, i.e., State.
6. In these circumstances, it would be appropriate in the interest of justice that impugned order be set aside and matter be remanded back to Revisional Authority for fresh consideration.
7. In view of above, orders impugned in these writ petitions passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, i.e., Revisional Authority, are hereby set aside and matter is remanded back to Revisional Authority to decide afresh after giving opportunity to petitioners to place their case controverting the documents produced by State. In case it is not possible to provide photocopy of documents of State, the Advocates of petitioners be allowed to inspect the record in presence of counsel for both parties so that Revisional Authority may pass a reasoned order by separately considering the three villages.
8. It is made clear that the Court has not entered into merit of case at this stage. The aforesaid exercise shall be concluded by Revisional Authority within a period of six months from today, if there is no legal impediment.
9. With aforesaid observations/ directions, all the writ petitions are disposed of. "
Order Date :- 16.12.2023 P. Pandey
Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition be disposed of in terms of the judgment in Writ B No.2652 of 2022.
Whether the impugned order should be set aside and the matter remanded to the Revisional Authority.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ram Prakash and 4 others Vs. State of U.P. and othersFollowed¶8
Writ B No.2652 of 2022 vide order dated 26.09.2023 (Ram Prakash and 4 others Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2023:AHC: 186828)
Rameshpal
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
