In a writ petition challenging an order under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, the High Court held that a second appeal lies before the Board of Revenue. The petition was dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.
Petitioner directed to file second appeal before the Board of Revenue within three weeks.
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:193811
Court No. - 51
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23711 of 2023
Petitioner :- Khaderu Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi,Devendra Deo Gupta
Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.
1.Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mridul Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents, Mr. Devendra Deo Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 and Mr. Bhupendra Kumar, learned Counsel for respondent No.4 and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents.
THIRD SCHEDULE
[See Sections 206, 207 and 208]
| Section | Description of suit application or proceedings |
Court or Officer of original jurisdiction |
First Appeal | Second Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| 116 | Suit for division of a holding |
Sub- Divisional Officer |
Commission er |
Board |
Order Date :- 9.10.2023 PS*
2
Digitally signed by :- PRITI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed given the availability of the alternative remedy of a second appeal.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Khaderu
State Of U.P
4 Others
Chandra Kumar Rai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
