Kusma Devi Vs Board of Revenue U.P. Lko Thru. Chairman and 12 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Kusma Devi Vs Board of Revenue U.P. Lko Thru. Chairman and 12 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to opposite party no.3/Sub Divisional Officer Magistrate, Tehsil-Maudaha, District-Hamirpur, to conclude the Section 24 proceedings within 90 days from the date of production of a certified copy of the order, avoiding unnecessary adjournments; impugned orders left untouched and no adjudication on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the certiorari reliefs were liable to be granted, i.e., quashing of the Board of Revenue's order dated 14.02.2025 dismissing the petitioner's revision and the Additional Commissioner's remand order dated 20.12.2024. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits, and the authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law; the impugned orders were not interfered with.

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of without interfering in the impugned order and without entering into the merits, with a direction to opposite party no.3/Sub Divisional Officer Magistrate, Tehsil-Maudaha, District-Hamirpur, to conclude the Section 24 proceedings within 90 days from the date of production of a certified copy of the order, being the period prescribed under Section 24(3) of the Code of 2006.

Key takeaways

For purposes of conclusion of the proceedings, opposite party no.3 shall avoid unnecessary adjournments.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Revenue — U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — Revision under Section 210 dismissed by Board of Revenue (order dated 14.02.2025) upholding challenge procedure against appellate remand order dated 20.12.2024 of Additional Commissioner-Ist, Chitrakootdham Manddal, which had remanded the petitioner's Section 24 case to the S.D.M., Tehsil-Maudaha, District-Hamirpur. Counsel for the petitioner (aged about 92 years) did not press for interference and sought only time-bound conclusion of proceedings. Disposing of the writ petition without interfering in the impugned order and without entering into the merits, the Court directed opposite party no.3/S.D.M. to conclude the proceedings within 90 days from production of a certified copy of the order — the period prescribed under Section 24(3) of the Code of 2006 — and to avoid unnecessary adjournments, leaving the authority free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:16608

Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 236 of 2025 Petitioner :- Kusma Devi Respondent :- Board Of Revenue U.P. Lko Thru. Chairman And 12 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhanu Bajpai,Rajeev Kumar Bajpai,Sachin Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

Heard.

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

The present petition has been filed for the following main relief:-

"a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 14.02.2025 passed by the respondent no. 1 i.e. Board of Revenue, annexed herewith as Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition;

b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 20.12.2024 passed by the respondent no. 2 i.e. Additional Commissioner 1st, Division Chitrakootdham, annexed herewith as Annexure No. 2 to this writ petition."

Considered the fact that vide order dated 14.02.2025 passed in revision registered as Revision No. REV/139/2025/Chitrakoot, Computerized Case No.R2025071900139 (Kusuma Devi Versus Additional Commissioner-Ist, Chitrakootdham Mandal, District-Hamirpur), under Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (in short 'Code of 2006'), the opposite party no.1/Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow ( in short 'Board'), dismissed the revision filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 20.12.2024 passed by opposite party no.2/Additional Commissioner-Ist, Chitrakootdham Mandal, District-Hamirpur (in short 'Appellate Authority'), whereby the Appellate Authority remanded the matter back to the Sub Divisional Officer Magistrate, Tehsil-Maudaha, DistrictHamirpur, for deciding the case instituted by the petitioner under Section 24 of Code of 2006.

After taking note of the aforesaid as also the facts of the case including the facts related to service of notice upon private opposite parties to file the appeal in which the order of remand dated 20.12.2024 was passed as also that the order of remand passed by the revisional authority dated 14.02.2025, a simplicitor order of remand, on being confronted, the learned Counsel for the petitioner says that without interfering in the impugned order, the present petition be disposed of finally with direction to the revenue court of first instance namely opposite party no.3/Sub Divisional Officer Magistrate, Tehsil-Maudaha, District-Hamirpur, to conclude the proceedings within time specified as the petitioner is aged about 92 years.

In view of the aforesaid and without interfering in the impugned order as also

without entering into the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with direction to opposite party no.3/Sub Divisional Officer Magistrate, TehsilMaudaha, District-Hamirpur, to conclude the proceedings within 90 days from the date of production of a certified copy of the order, as the period prescribed under Section 24(3) of the Code of 2006. For the purposes of conclusion of proceedings, the opposite party no.3 shall avoid unnecessary adjournment.

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

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of.

Order Date :- 24.3.2025 Jyoti/-

Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench