Dismissed¶16

Dulare @ Ramdulare and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2024/7627/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench; Anish Kumar Gupta, J.; decided 17.10.2024; writ petition dismissed. Keywords: certiorari; mandamus; stay of ex parte decree; recall application; non-disclosure of pending recall application; Section 229(B); Section 331(3); U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950; Commissioner Devipatan Division, Gonda / Commissioner, Bahraich; Atirikt Adhikari-I, Bahraich; expeditious disposal of appeal. Neutral citation: 2024:AHC-LKO:70091.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no relief on the challenge to the appellate order dated 05.03.2024. Only a direction was issued to the Commissioner, Bahraich to dispose of the appeal expeditiously. ¶16

Dulare @ Ramdulare and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition dismissed; no relief on the challenge to the appellate order dated 05.03.2024. Only a direction was issued to the Commissioner, Bahraich to dispose of the appeal expeditiously.

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition should be entertained against the appellate order dated 05.03.2024 admitting the private respondents' appeal and staying the ex parte order dated 22.01.2024, given that the appeal was filed without disclosing the pending recall application. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

No illegality was found in the appellate order dated 05.03.2024 admitting the appeal and staying the order dated 22.01.2024, because the Commissioner passed it being conscious of the pendency of the recall application, which had been pointed out before the Appellate Court.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The Court found no good reason to entertain the instant writ petition and dismissed it.

¶16

Key takeaways

Without adverting to the merits of the case, the Commissioner, Bahraich was directed to proceed in the matter (the appeal) as expeditiously as possible.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT - C No. 7627 of 2024 (neutral citation 2024:AHC-LKO:70091), High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Anish Kumar Gupta, J., order dated 17.10.2024 — dismissed. The petitioners sought certiorari to quash the appellate order dated 05.03.2024 in Case No. 205/2024 ('Mewalal & Ors. Vs Ramdulare & Ors.') under Section 331(3) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, whereby the Commissioner admitted the private respondents' appeal and stayed the ex parte decree dated 22.01.2024 passed under Section 229(B) by the Atirikt Adhikari-I, Bahraich in Case No. 16/2007-2008 ('Ramdulare Vs Mewalal'). The grievance was non-disclosure in the appeal of the pending recall application. The Court found no illegality, holding that the Commissioner admitted the appeal fully aware of the pending recall application, dismissed the writ petition, and directed the Commissioner, Bahraich to proceed with the appeal as expeditiously as possible without adverting to merits.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70091

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7627 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Dulare @ Ramdulare And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow And Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashutosh Mishra,Manoj Kumar Nishad,Paritosh Shukla

¶6

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta

¶7

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶8

Heard Sri Paritosh Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for the opposite party no.3 and Sri Ram Kumar Maurya, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶9

The instant petition has been filed with the following prayer:

¶10

"i. Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of 'Certiorari' quashing impugned order dated 05/03/2024 passed by Learned Commissioner, Devipatan Division, Gonda in Case No. 205/2024, Computerized Case No. C202408000000205, 'Mewalal & Ors. Vs Ramdulare & Ors.', under section 331 (3) of UP Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Annexure-1), in the interest of justice;

¶11

ii. Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of 'Mandamus' commanding and directing the Respondents authorities to comply with order dated 22/01/2024 passed by Learned Atirikt Adhikari-I, Bahraich in Case No. 16/2007-2008, Computerised Case No. D20120815002, 'Ramdulare Vs Mewalal', under section 229 (B) of UP Zamidari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Annexure-2), in the interest of justice."

¶12

The brief facts of the case are that a declaratory suit for declaration and partition was filed by the petitioners herein under Section 229(b) of the UP Zamidari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, which was decreed ex parte in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 22.01.2024, against which the private respondents no. 4 to 10 had filed a recall application and simultaneously the appeal has been filed under Section 331 (3) of the UP Zamidari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. In the appeal, it is alleged by the petitioners that the private respondents have not disclosed that they have filed a recall application against the order dated 22.01.2024.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an objection

¶14

was filed by the petitioners before the Appellate Court pointing out the aforesaid pendency of the recall application before the court below. Thereafter vide order dated 05.03.2024, the Appellate Court i.e. the Commissioner, Bahraich has admitted the appeal and stayed the operation of the order dated 22.01.2024, against which the instant petition has been filed by the petitioners herein.

¶15

The only grievance of the petitioners is that the said appeal was filed by the private respondents without disclosing of the recall application, which is pending. However, when the order dated 05.03.2024 has been passed admitting the appeal, the Commissioner was fully aware about the pendency of the recall application as has been pointed out before the Appellate Court.

¶16

In view thereof, this Court does not find any illegality in the impugned order dated 22.01.2024, which has been passed by the Commissioner, Bahraich being conscious of the fact of pending of recall application. Therefore, this Court does not find any good reason to entertain the instant writ petition and is accordingly, dismissed.

¶17

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners has prayed for a direction for expeditious disposal of the appeal preferred by the private respondents.

¶18

In view thereof, without adverting to the merits of the case, the Commissioner, Bahraich is hereby directed to proceed in the matter as expeditiously as possible.

¶19

Order Date :- 17.10.2024 Ashish pd.

¶20

(Anish Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH PRASAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dulare @ Ramdulare and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dulare @ Ramdulare and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Duryodhan Singh Vs D.D.C. and Others

Rani Devi Vs Tehsildar (Judicial) Tehsil Bangar Mau, Unnaoand Another

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Ashadevi Vs Board of Revenue,U.P. at Lucknow Thru. Its Secy. and 4 Others

Rajendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Auraiya and Others

Babu Khan Vs Settlement Officer Consolidation, Amethi and Others