Disposed

Saroj Kant Pathak v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue, Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC29 Apr 2025A227/2406/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Article 227 sought a direction to the Commissioner to hear a pending land revenue revision on admission and decide an interim relief application. The High Court disposed of the petition directing decision within two months, without examining merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No. 2/Commissioner, Lucknow Division to decide the interim relief application dated 04.03.2025 in Revision C202510000001051 within two months from next date fixed.

Saroj Kant Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24364

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2406 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Saroj Kant Pathak Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh K. Tripathi,Pankaj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and Sri Yogesh Kumar Awasthi, learned State counsel.

¶7

In view of order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to the private-respondent(s) is hereby dispensed with.

¶8

The instant petition has been preferred seeking following main relief(s):-

¶9

"To issue an order or direction thereby directing the opposite party no. 2 to hear the matter on admission and decide the interim relief application of the petitioner dated 04.03.2025 moved under section 219 of U.P. L.R Act, which has been registered as Revision No. C202510000001051 "Saroj Kant Pathak Vs Nayab Tehsildar and Others", pending before the opposite party no. 2, within some stipulated time by the Hon'ble Court."

¶10

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case and period of pendency of the application in issue, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to the Authority concerned namely respondent No. 2/Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow to hear the matter on admission and consider and decide the interim relief application in issue, indicated in above quoted prayer clause of this petition, on the next date fixed in the case, if possible, and if it is not possible, then within a period of two months from the next date fixed in the case, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties to the litigation and without granting unnecessary adjournment to either party.

¶11

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either party on merits and the Authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.

¶12

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 29.4.2025 Arun/-

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Saroj Kant Pathak v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saroj Kant Pathak v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Manorath Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lko. and 4 Others

Mohammad Irfan Vs Sub Divisional Officer, Jalalpur, Ambedkar Nagar and 2 Others

Smt. Ramavati Vs Consolidation Officer, Milkipur, Ayodhya and Others

Devki Nandan Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Collector, Gonda and 4 Others

Devendra Nath Singh Vs Board of Revenue,U.P., Lucknow Thru.Chairman,Revenue and 4 Others

Ram Naresh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Principal Secretary, Revenue, Lucknow and 3 Others