Petitioner challenged mutation order passed without hearing due to filed caveat. Court refused to entertain writ and granted liberty to move application to Sub Divisional Officer for hearing within two weeks.
Petitioner granted liberty to move application to Sub Divisional Officer for hearing within two 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. - 2024:AHC-LKO:5050
Court No. - 8
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 416 of 2024
Petitioner :- Rajesh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhir Kumar Rai
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dharmendra Kumar,Mohan Singh
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Notice on behalf respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 has been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel. Sri Mohan Singh, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 4.
Sri Prabhat Kumar, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 5 who has filed his vakalatnama which is taken on record.
The grievance as raised by the petitioner is to the effect that in mutation proceedings, an order was passed by the Tehsildar mutating the name of the petitioner. The private respondent no. 5 is said to have filed an appeal which is engaging the attention of the Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil, Bikapur, District Ayodhya and the Appellate Court by means of order dated 07.12.2023 while entertaining the appeal and issuing notices has also granted an interim order.
The submission is that the petitioner had filed a caveat on 30th November, 2023 but despite the same the appeal was entertained without noticing the petitioner and the interim order was passed.
A specific query was put to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether he has filed his objections before the Appellate Authority to which he answered in the negative.
Considering the aforesaid and the nature of the controversy involved, this Court is not inclined to entertain the petitioner at this stage rather liberty is granted to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the respondent no. 2 raising all his grievance and in case if any such application is moved, the same shall be considered by the Sub Divisional Officer concerned peremptorily and decide the same within a period of
two weeks from the date, the said application is moved.
It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the court concerned shall decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .
Order Date :- 18.1.2024 Asheesh
Digitally signed by :- ASHEESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Rajesh and another
State of U.P. Through Secy. Revenue, Lucknow
Jaspreet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
