Shyam Mohan Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Revenue, Lko and Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shyam Mohan Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Revenue, Lko and Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioner to move a proper application for recall before the Nayab Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District Sultanpur within the next two weeks; if so moved in time, the authority to consider and decide it expeditiously in accordance with law after hearing all the parties concerned.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 02.09.2025 of the Nayab Tehsildar allowing the private respondents' mutation application under S.34 of the U.P. Revenue Code without making the petitioner a party (the disputed land being recorded in his name) should be recalled or set aside. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move a proper application for recall before the Nayab Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District Sultanpur within the next two weeks.

Key takeaways

If the recall application is moved within the prescribed period of two weeks, the Nayab Tehsildar shall consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 5 | WRIT - C No. 11127 of 2025 | Shyam Mohan Srivastava v. State of U.P.: Writ petition against the Nayab Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District Sultanpur's order dated 02.09.2025 allowing the private respondents' mutation application under S.34 U.P. Revenue Code (disputed land recorded in petitioner's name; petitioner not made a party) is disposed of without entering into merits. With a recall application already pending under the proviso to Section 209 and an appeal remedy under S.35(2) noted by the Standing Counsel, the petitioner is granted liberty to file a proper recall application within two weeks; if filed within that time, the Nayab Tehsildar shall consider and decide it expeditiously in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to all parties concerned. Decided December 3, 2025; Hon'ble Alok Mathur, J. (sole member).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

WRIT - C No. - 11127 of 2025

Shyam Mohan Srivastava

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue, Lko And Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Prabhakar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

Court No. - 5

HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.

Heard Ms. Ayushi Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Prabhakar Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 02.09.2025 passed by Nayab Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District - Sultanpur whereby the application for mutation preferred by private respondents has been allowed.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the disputed land has been recorded in the name of petitioner and without making the petitioner as a party the application U/S 34 of U.P. Revenue Code has been allowed. Accordingly, the order dated 02.09.2025 has been assailed in the present writ petition.

Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that petitioner has efficacious remedy of filing an appeal U/S 35(2) of U.P. Revenue Code and further submits that as far as the order dated 02.09.2025 is concerned the petitioner has already moved an application for recall under proviso to Section 209 of U.P. Revenue Code before the Nayab Tehsildar and for the same cause of action writ proceedings would not be maintainable.

Learned counsel for petitioner does not dispute the aforesaid facts and

WRIC No. 11127 of 2025

2

seeks liberty to file proper application for recall before the Nayab Tehsildar and confines her prayer for a direction to Nayab Tehsildar to decide the said application in a time bound manner.

In view of the above, without entering into merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move proper application for recall before Nayab Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar District Sultanpur within next two weeks and in case such an application is moved within such time, the said authority shall consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned.

(Alok Mathur,J.)

December 3, 2025

Ravi/

Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench