Writ petition seeking quashing of interim stay order passed without hearing caveat petitioner. High Court disposed of petition in limine providing liberty to move vacation/recess application while directing expeditious hearing.
Liberty to move vacation/recall application directed to be decided expeditiously with hearing.
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:38884
Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 532 of 2024
Petitioner :- Devtadeen Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Bahraich And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Heard.
The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing of the impugned interim order dated 14.2.2024 passed by respondent No.1, Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bahraich in Revision No.370 'Dharmraj and others vs. Devtadeen And others , under 48 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the revision was filed against the judgment and order dated 29.1.2024 passed in an Appeal under Section 11 (1) of Act, 1953, in which the petitioner was respondent and appeal was decided in his favour. Against the said appellate order, the revision was preferred by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and the Revisional Court admitted the appeal and passed an order of status quo without hearing the petitioner, though, the caveat was filed.
On being asked from the learned counsel for the petitioner whether the petitioner has moved any application for vacation of the impugned stay order dated 14.2.2024 bringing on record the facts which have been mentioned in the present writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that no such application has been preferred by the petitioner and he has directly approached this Court by filing the present writ petition and prayed that the present writ petition may be disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move a stay/ recall application against the order dated 14.2.2024 and the direction may be issued to the respondent No.1 to decide the same expeditiously or within a period fixed by this court.
Learned State counsel has no objection to the prayer made by petitioner.
On the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, without entering into the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application either vacation or recall of the order dated 14.2.2024 and if any such application is preferred by the petitioner, it is expected that the respondent No.1 shall decide the same expeditiously, in accordance with law, by giving opportunity of hearing to all the parties and without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
Order Date :- 22.5.2024 Gurpreet Singh
Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to exercise writ jurisdiction in an interim order passed in a revision prior to hearing the caveat petitioner.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Devtadeen
Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bahraich
Manish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
