Naseem Khan and Another Vs Dist. Magistrate Balrampur and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:56219-DB

Court No. - 3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3328 of 2024

Petitioner :- Naseem Khan And Another Respondent :- Dist. Magistrate Balrampur And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Mishra,Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

alongwith

¶6

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4305 of 2024 Petitioner :- Mohd. Mahboob Khan Respondent :- District Magistrate , Balrampur And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Mishra,Nishant Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶7

and

¶8

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3778 of 2024 Petitioner :- Naseem Khan And Another Respondent :- District Magistrate , Balrampur And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Mishra,Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶9

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶10

(1) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

(2) These three writ petitions are being taken up together because they relate to the same piece of land of Gata No.589/2373, which has been purchased by the petitioners from their co-tenure holders. In Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.3328 of 2024, Mohd. Naseem Khan and Aditya Prasad had approached this Court praying for a direction in the nature of Mandamus to the Respondents to take appropriate action against the Revenue Inspector and the Area Lekhpal for disobeying the order passed by the S.D.M. dated 28.10.2017 in a case under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code. It was alleged that the

¶12

Revenue Inspector and the Area Lekhpal were disturbing the demarcation carried out in pursuance of the order passed by the S.D.M., Balrampur dated 23.05.2018. The petitioners had complained to the S.D.M., Balrampur, on 23.03.2024 on the same day, when the Revenue Inspector and the Area Lekhpal had visited the land and threatened them.

¶13

(3) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.3778 of 2024 has been filed by Mohd. Naseem Khan alongwith Aditya Prasad praying for a direction to be issued in the nature of Ceritorari for quashing the order dated 12.04.2024 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Balrampur, reopening the case under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code. In the said writ petition filed in April, 2024, it was alleged that after Writ Petition No.3328 of 2024 was entertained by the Court and the learned Standing Counsel was directed to seek instructions by the Court on 10.04.2024, the order dated 12.04.2024 has been issued by the S.D.M. alleging that the petitioner Mohd. Naseem Khan had made an application to him to reopen the demarcation proceedings with regard to Gata No.589/2373.

¶14

(4) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.4305 of 2024 has been filed by Mohd. Mahboob Khan son of Shubrati, the brother of Naseem Khan son of Shubrati also challenging the order dated 12.04.2024.

¶15

(5) In Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.4305 of 2024, a counter affidavit has been filed by the State-respondents on 02.07.2024 in which it has been mentioned that Gata No.589 Min. / 0.0250 Hectare situated at Village Kodari, Pargana, Tehsil & District Balrampur, is recorded as Naveen parti land and adjacent to Gata No.590 /0.0190 Hectare in the same village is recorded as " land covered by water ". Another Gata No.589/0.287 Hectare adjacent to Gata No.589 is recorded in the name of the petitioner Mohd. Mahboob Khan S/o Shubrati and Mohd. Naseem Khan as co-tenure holders. Mohd. Naseem Khan had filed an application on 23.03.2024 before the S.D.M. praying that the earlier proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code in respect of Gata No.589/2373 having been completed, the Village Pradhan, Smt. Rinki Verma and her husband were interfering in the peaceful possession of the applicants and that they should be restrained. In pursuance of the application made by Mohd. Naseem Khan, the S.D.M., Balrampur, had called for a report from the Tehsildar. A report has been

¶16

submitted on 02.04.2024 saying that the order passed by the Competent Court in the case under Section 24 has already been complied with. There is no need to initiate any fresh proceedings for compliance of the order dated 16.05.2018.

¶17

(6) Learned Counsel for the petitioners says that he is satisfied now with the fresh report dated 02.04.2024, a copy of which has been filed enclosed as C.A.-4 to the counter affidavit.

¶18

(7) All three writ petitions are disposed of as no fresh orders are required from this Court and the dispute having been settled by the S.D.M. in 2018.

¶19

Order Date :- 14.8.2024 N.PAL

¶20

Digitally signed by :- NARESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Naseem Khan and Another v. Dist. Magistrate Balrampur and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naseem Khan and Another v. Dist. Magistrate Balrampur and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Gyatri Devi Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas New Delhi and 2 Others

Anil Kumar Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 4 Others

Ashish Singh Vs Union of India Ministry of External Affairs New Delhi Thru. Chief Secy. and 3 Others

M/S Mikki Jarda Store Thru. Proprietor Manoj Kumar Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Finance , Lko. and 2 Others

Noman Ahmad Vs Union of India Thru. Its Secy. Finance Ministry New Delhi and Another

Umesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Law Lko. and 3 Others