Chandrapal and 4 Others Vs Board of Revenue U.P. Lko. Thru. Chairman and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Chandrapal and 4 Others Vs Board of Revenue U.P. Lko. Thru. Chairman and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Directions to the Chairman, Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow to consider and decide the admission of the revision and the application for interim injunction within ten days of a certified copy of the order being brought on record, after affording opportunity of hearing to the opposite parties; notice to opposite party no.5 dispensed with.

Issue for consideration

Whether summoning of the records of the court below in revisional proceedings without admitting the revision is against the provisions of the revenue court manual. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

In view of the order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to opposite party no.5 stands dispensed with.

Key takeaways

The court found that the only apprehension of the petitioner discernible is that, due to summoning of record, his application for interim relief preferred before the trial court would remain pending.ratio¶13
Opposite party no.1, i.e., Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow through its Chairman, is directed to consider and decide the aspect of admission of the revision as well as the application for grant of interim injunction within ten days from the date a certified copy of the order is brought on record, after providing opportunity of hearing to the opposite parties.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT - B No. 216 of 2025 (High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench; Manish Mathur, J.; order dated 12.3.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:15072): Petitioners challenged the order dated 30.01.2025 passed in their revision preferred under Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act, whereby the records of the court below were summoned in revisional proceedings without admitting the revision, objected to as contrary to the provisions of the revenue court manual. With the trial-court record summoned, the petitioner's interim-relief application before the trial court stood to remain pending, while an interim-relief application submitted by the revisionist before the revisional court was itself pending; the next revisional date was 30.4.2025. The court dispensed with notice to opposite party no.5 and, finding the petitioner's sole discernible apprehension to be the pendency of his interim-relief application, disposed of the petition with a direction to the Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow through its Chairman to consider and decide both the admission of the revision and the application for interim injunction within ten days of a certified copy of the order being brought on record, after affording the opposite parties an opportunity of hearing.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:15072

Court No. - 19

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 216 of 2025 Petitioner :- Chandrapal And 4 Others Respondent :- Board Of Revenue U.P. Lko. Thru. Chairman And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogesh Singh,Krinker Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned State Counsel for opposite parties no.1 to 3 and Mr. Prashant Pandey, Advocate for opposite party no.4 whose power filed today is taken on record.

In view of the order proposed to be passed issuance of notice to opposite party no.5 stands dispensed with.

Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 30.01.2025 passed in revision preferred by the petitioners under section 219 of the Land Revenue Act. Certain other concomittent prayers have also been made.

It has been submitted that by means of the impugned order the records of the Court below have been summoned in revisional proceedings without admitting the revision which is against the provision of revenue court manual.

It is also submitted that in view of the fact that record of the trial court has been summoned the petitioner's application for interim relief which was filed before the learned trial court would remain pending with the result that opposite parties/ defendants would be at liberty to change the nature of the property in dispute.

It is also submitted that the next date fixed in the revisional proceedings are 30.4.2025.

Learned counsel appearing for private opposite party no.4 have refuted submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that they have already put in appearance in the revisional proceedings.

It is denied that there is any urgency in the matter or that the petitioner is entitled to any interim relief.

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the material on record, the only apprehension of petitioner discernible is that due to summoning of record the application for interim relief preferred by him before the trial court would remain pending.

It is admitted between the parties that an application for

interim relief has already been submitted by the revisionist before the revisional court which is still pending consideration.

In view of the urgency indicated by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the fact that a long date of 30.4.2025 has been fixed by the revisional court, the opposite party no.1, i.e., Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow through its Chairman is directed to consider and decide the aspect of admission of revision as well as the application for grant of interim injunction within a period of ten days from the date a certified copy of this order is brought on record of proceedings after providing opportunity of hearing to the opposite parties as well.

With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of .

Order Date :- 12.3.2025 mks

Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench