Smt. Anjum Fatima Ashraf @ Anjum Fatima Jafri Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko. U.P. and 6 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:20743

Court No. - 7

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 254 of 2024

Petitioner :- Smt. Anjum Fatima Ashraf @ Anjum Fatima Jafri Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko. U.P. And 6 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Mansoor,Syed Ali Rehan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Aftab Ahmad,Lalit Kishore Tiwari

¶6

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶7

Heard Mohd. Mansoor, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned State counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 & 6 and Sri Lalit Kishore Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5.

¶8

By means of this petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 27.02.2024 passed by respondent No. 2/Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow in a revision registered as Case No. REV/526/2024/Barabanki, Computerized Case No. R2024041200526 (Smt. Anjum Fatima Ashraf vs. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Bakshi Ka Talab) instituted under Section 219 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (in short "Act of 1901").

¶9

By the order impugned dated 27.02.2024, the respondent No. 2 after taking note of Section(s) 265(2) and 275 of U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939 (in short "Act of 1939") dismissed the aforesaid revision being not maintainable with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal in terms of provisions of the Act of 1939. The relevant portion of the order dated 27.02.2024, being relevant, is extracted hereunder:-

¶10

" उपररकसससपषहहककयय०पप०टसनसनसपएकट, 1939 ममपपररतआदसशकसकवरद उनहपपकरणणममकनगरपनपपरषणपयहह, जहपहअपपलकपपपकवधपननहहहह।उ 0 प 0 कपशतकपरपअधधकनयमककधपरप-265(2) ममअपपलकपपपकवधपनहहजरबपधयकपरप हह।ककनततकनगरपनपकतरदपरपउ०प०भय-रपजसवअधधकनयम-1901 ककधपरप-219 महठसकनगरपनपपसत ककगईहहजबककउ 0 प 0 कपशतकपरपअधधकनयम, 1939 मम पपररतआदसशकसकवरदअपपलअथवपकनगरपनपउ 0 प 0 कपशतकपरपअधधकनयमकस पपकवधपनणकसअनतगरतहपगपहयहरगप।अततपशनगतकनगरपनपपरषणपयनहरनसकस कपरणगपहयतपसतरपरहपकनरसतककजपतपहह।कनगरपनपकतपरयकदचपहसतरपशनगत आदसशकसकवरदसकमनयपयपलयकससमकअपपलयरधजतकरसकतपहह। बपद आवशयककपयरवपहपपतपवलपदपधखलदफतरहर।"

¶11

Taking note of the aforesaid as also the law laid down by this Court in the case(s) of B. Manmohan Lal and others vs. B. Raj Kumar Lal and others reported in MANU/UP/0017/1945 ; Gorakh Nath Upadhya vs. State of U.P. and others reported in MANU/UP/0669/1986 ; Paras Jain vs. Izhar Ahmad reported in MANU/UP/1607/2014 and the by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case(s) of Rahimal Bathu and others vs. Ashiyal Beevi reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC

¶12

1226 and The Koushik Mutually Aided Cooperative Housing Society vs. Ameena Begum and another reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1662 as also the statutory provisions indicated in the impugned order dated 27.02.2024 i.e. Section(s) 265(2) and Section 275 as also Section 265(3) of the Act of 1939 and Group B of the Fourth Schedule of the Act of 1939 in which Section 59 has been mentioned at Sl. No. 3 and the fact that the suit preferred by the petitioner before Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil- Bakshi Ka Talab, District- Lucknow registered as Case No. T201804120113839 (Smt. Khalida Fazali and others vs. Chairman Nagar Palika Parishad, Nawabganj, Barabanki) under Section 59 of the Act of 1939 was finally decided by the competent authority namely SubDivisional Magistrate, Tehsil- Nawabganj, District- Barabanki under the Act of 1939 as also the expressions "appeal" and "any case decided" embedded in Section 265(2) & (3) and 275, respectively, of the Act of 1939, this Court is of the view that against the final order/decree deciding a suit, an appeal would lie and revision would not lie and accordingly the Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned order dated 27.02.2024 challenged by means of present petition.

¶13

The petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority under the Act of 1939.

¶14

Order Date :- 7.3.2024 Arun/-

¶15

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

Smt. Anjum Fatima Ashraf @ Anjum Fatima Jafri v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko. U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Anjum Fatima Ashraf @ Anjum Fatima Jafri v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko. U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd.Basir Khan Vs A.D.C.

Ram Udit Pal and Another Vs Add. Commissioner Judicial Ayodhya Mandal Ayodhya and 2 Others

Ran Jeet Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Sri Thakur Mahraj, Virajman Mandir, Deoria Thru. Sarvarakar Triloki Nath Jaiswal and Others Vs Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman and Others

Shyam Lal Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Ram Sagar Vs Board of Revenue U.P Lko. Thru. Its Chairman and 2 Others