The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an interim order granted in an appeal pending under Section 24(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, holding no remedy existed other than the statutory appeal.
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:82723
Court No. - 8
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6360 of 2024
Petitioner :- Dharampal Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gyanendra Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard Shri Gyanendra Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the Staterespondents.
At the time when the Court assembled in the morning, a mention was made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this is a matter where there is huge urgency and several times the matter has been mentioned, but could not be taken up. This mention was made despite the fact that the Court had informed learned Members of the Bar that the Court is not available after the lunch as there is a Full Bench where this Court is also one of the Member, despite the same, it was insisted that the matter be taken up, therefore, at the mentioning stage itself, the petition has been taken up.
From a perusal of the order-sheet, it indicates that the when the matter was taken up on 29.07.2024, there was none to press the petition. Later, an application bearing Civil Misc. Application No.2 of 2024 was moved by the learned counsel for the petitioner which was also not pressed and thereafter the matter has been listed, but it could not be taken up.
In the aforesaid backdrop, the Court has taken up out of turn as first case and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in proceedings arising out of Section 24(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 where an appeal is pending before the respondent No.2 and an order dated 12.12.2023 has been passed by which the appeal was admitted and an interim order was granted of which quashing has been sought.
A specific query was put to the learned counsel for the petitioner that as to how the instant petition is maintainable to which he submits that since the appeal is pending before the respondent No.2 and an interlocutory order has been passed against which the petitioner does not have any remedy, hence,
the instant petition.
It was also put to the learned counsel for the petitioner whether the a petition lies against an interlocutory order to which learned counsel for the petitioner could not answer successfully.
Be that as it may, this Court finds that by the impugned order a statutory appeal under Section 24(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been admitted and interim order has been granted. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not inform what is the status of the appeal and whether the petitioner has moved any application for vacation of the interim order especially when the interim order is dated 12.12.2023 and the petition itself was filed in the month of July, 2024 and naturally several dates must have been fixed by now.
Thus, since the appeal is already pending and if any order has been passed, the petitioner in terms of the Scheme of the U.P., Revenue Code, 2004 may take recourse in law as may be available to the petitioner, however, the instant petition assailing the order dated 12.12.2023 which has been passed and as it does not impact the rights of the petitioner, prima-facie, and this Court is not persuaded to entertain the petition which is accordingly dismissed.
It is made clear that this Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the Court concerned shall consider and decide the case of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 11.12.2024 Rakesh/-
Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition is maintainable against an interim order admitted under Section 24(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 when a statutory appeal is pending.
Whether the petitioner has availed of the statutory remedy against an interlocutory order.
Whether the interim order impacts the substantive rights of the petitioner.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
U.P., Revenue Code, 2004Referred¶14
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dharampal Yadav
State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow
Jaspreet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
4 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
