This single-judge bench dismissed a writ petition challenging the failure of the District Magistrate to decide a representation. The Court held that with civil suits and revenue proceedings pending regarding the subject plot, no interference under Article 226 was required.
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:198559
Court No. - 51
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 25061 of 2023 Petitioner :- Lalit Vishwakarma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamal Dev Singh Chanchal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.
(1) Case No. T202314180304755
Order Date :- 13.10.2023 PS*
Digitally signed by :- PRITI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether writ jurisdiction should be exercised to direct the District Magistrate to decide a pending representation regarding land disputes.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Lalit Vishwakarma
State Of U.P.
Chandra Kumar Rai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
