Disposed

Virendra Vikram Singh v. Vimal Kumar Singh and Others

Allahabad HC22 Aug 2024/538/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the Board of Revenue's interim order admitting a revision and issuing notices. Court did not quash the order but granted liberty to the petitioner to seek urgent disposal of the interim relief application before the revenue authority.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to approach Board of Revenue for expedited disposal of interim relief application with timelines for decision.

Virendra Vikram Singh Vs Vimal Kumar Singh and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:57370

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 538 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Virendra Vikram Singh Respondent :- Vimal Kumar Singh And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Ujagir Verma,Sachin Verma

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the material available on record.

¶7

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has made following prayer:-

¶8

"(a) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 10.04.2024 passed by Judicial Member, Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow, regarding only order for issuance of notice as contained in Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition.

¶9

(a-1) an order or direction may be issued that opposite party nos. 1, 2 and 3 did not alienate the property in question and also maintain the status quo regarding the disputed property till disposal of this writ petition/revision petition."

¶10

It is noticed that by means of impugned order dated 10.04.2024, the Board of Revenue has admitted the revision preferred by the petitioner and also issued notices to the respondents therein and had fixed the same for 7.4.2024.

¶11

It seems that either the application for interim relief was not pressed or it was pressed but it was not taken note by the revisional court, consequently, by means of the present writ petition, the petitioner instead of seeking a direction to the Board of Revenue to decide his application for interim relief had assailed the validity of the order dated 10.4.2024 by which his revision was admitted.

¶12

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for

¶13

petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case, application for interim relief is duly considered and decided by the Board of Revenue with expedition.

¶14

Learned Standing Counsel does not object to the prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner.

¶15

Accordingly, noticing that the application for interim relief has been filed by the petitioner before the Board of Revenue, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow and move an appropriate application detailing urgency for expeditious disposal of the same along with the order passed by this Court, within two weeks from today, and in case, if such an application is moved, the Board of Revenue shall consider and decide the same within three weeks thereafter, and in case any case for urgency is made out by the petitioner, it shall pass appropriate orders thereupon, in accordance with law.

¶16

The petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the proceedings before the Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow.

¶17

With the aforesaid observations/directions, this petition is disposed of.

¶18

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 22.8.2024 Virendra

¶20

Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Virendra Vikram Singh v. Vimal Kumar Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Vikram Singh v. Vimal Kumar Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kali Prasad vs Shri Sada Nand Saroj, Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar

Mohd. Usman @ Mahtav @ Mohd. Shameem Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and Another

Smt. Pooja Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Prem Kumar and Others Vs Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow. Thru. Chairman and Others

Amit Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 2 Others

Vivek Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another