Single judge disposed the petition by dismissing it. Held there was no scope for interference as the petitioner failed to seek condonation of delay for the time-barred revision.
Petition dismissed; petitioner may take recourse to own proceedings.
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:2078
Court No. - 8
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 96 of 2024
Petitioner :- Laxmi Prasad And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Bhanu Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
any scope for interference in the impugned order. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed . Since it is an issue of demarcation. Accordingly, the petitioner, if, aggrieved, may take recourse to his own proceedings which in any case shall be decided on its own merit by the authority concerned.
Order Date :- 9.1.2024 KR/ank
Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the impugned order regarding the revision filed without an application for condonation of delay.
Laxmi Prasad
State Of U.P.
Jaspreet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
