Disposed¶12

Aalamgeer and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC10 Sept 2025WRIC/31627/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Expeditious disposal; writ of mandamus; Section 35(2) U.P. Revenue Code, 2006; revenue appeal maintainability then merits; admission-stage disposal without counter affidavit; two-month timeline from certified copy; Azamgarh; Extra Magistrate 2nd; Appeal No. 6876 of 2025; no adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus-type direction upon respondent no. 2 (identified in the prayer as the Extra Magistrate 2nd, Azamgarh) to decide Appeal No. 6876 of 2025 (Iftekar Ahmad vs. Aalamgeer and others, Computer Case No. T202515060106876) under Section 35(2), U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, preferably within two months from production of a certified copy of the order; no merits adjudication by the High Court. ¶12

Aalamgeer and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent no. 2 should be directed to decide the pending Appeal No. 6876 of 2025 under Section 35(2), U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (first on maintainability, then on merits) within a stipulated time.

¶7

Court's answer

As no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage without calling for a counter affidavit or issuing notice to the private respondents.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

Respondent no. 2 is directed to decide Appeal No. 6876 of 2025 (Iftekar Ahmad vs. Aalamgeer and others, Computer Case No. T202515060106876) in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, preferably within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order.

¶11

Key takeaways

The Court expressly clarified that it has not adjudicated the matter on merits; its directions are confined to securing disposal of the pending appeal.obiter¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.) — WRIT-C No. 31627 of 2025 (Aalamgeer and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others): writ petition seeking a mandamus for expeditious disposal disposed of at the admission stage, without a counter affidavit or notice to the private respondents. Respondent no. 2 (the forum named in the prayer as the Extra Magistrate 2nd, Azamgarh) directed to decide Appeal No. 6876 of 2025 (Iftekar Ahmad vs. Aalamgeer and others; Computer Case No. T202515060106876) under Section 35(2), U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, in accordance with law after hearing all affected parties, preferably within two months of production of a certified copy of the order. The Court expressly recorded that it had not adjudicated the matter on merits.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 31627 of 2025

¶3

Aalamgeer And 4 Others	Versus	.....Petitioner(s)
State Of U.P. And 4 Others		.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Devbratt Yadav	Yadav, Ram Pratap
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Srivastav	Sanjay Kumar a
Court No.- 34

¶4

HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.

¶5

1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶6

"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding Extra Magistrate 2nd Azamgarh to decide the Appeal being Appeal No. 6876 of 2025 (Iftekar Ahmad vs. Aalamgeer and others) Computer Case No. T202515060106876 under section 35(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, on the question of maintainability and then to proceed further on merits of the Appeal, in the better interest of justice."

¶7

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that appeal filed under Section 35(2) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending consideration before respondent no. 2. The sole prayer made in the writ petition is for expeditious disposal of the same.

¶8

3. As no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending, the writ petition is being disposed of, at the admission stage, without calling for counter affidavit or issuing notice to private respondents, with a direction upon respondent no. 2 to decide the Appeal No. 6876 of 2025 {Iftekar Ahmad vs. Aalamgeer and others (Computer Case No.

¶9

WRIC No. 31627 of 2025

¶10

¶11

T202515060106876)}, in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶12

4. With the aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶13

5. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the matter on merits.

¶14

September 11, 2025 V.S.Singh

¶15

(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)

¶16

Digitally signed by :- VIDYA SAGAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aalamgeer and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aalamgeer and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases