Disposed¶17

Anoop Kumar v. Commissioner Prayagraj Division Prayagraj and 6 Others

Allahabad HC24 Sept 2025WRIC/34253/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mandamus for time-bound disposal of revenue revision; Section 210 U.P. Revenue Code, 2006; Section 30 U.P. Revenue Code; Chief Revenue Officer order dated 10.09.2024; Commissioner Prayagraj Division; revision pending admission; direction to decide within three months; writ disposed of without entering merits; no notice to private respondents 3 to 7.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 1 (Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj) to decide pending Revision No. 1838 of 2025 expeditiously, preferably within three months from the date of filing of certified copy of the order, after putting all necessary parties to notice. ¶17

Anoop Kumar Vs Commissioner Prayagraj Division Prayagraj and 6 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 34253 of 2025

Anoop Kumar

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Commissioner Prayagraj Division Prayagraj And 6 Others

¶7

Counsel for Petitioner(s) ers	: Sudhir Kumar .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Azad Rai, C.S.C.

¶8

Court No. - 53

¶9

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

¶10

Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and Sri Rajan Chauhan, Advocate holding brief of Sri Azad Rai representing respondent no. 2.

¶11

The present petition has been filed for following relief:

¶12

"Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 1 (Commissioner Prayagraj Division Prayagraj) to decide the revision no. 1838/2025 and Computerized no. C202502000001838, Anup Kumar versus Shivram & another, of the under section 210 U.P. Revenue code 2006, pending before respondent no.1, otherwise the petitioner shall be suffer irreparable loss and injury."

¶13

It is contended by the petitioner that in the proceedings under Section 30 of the U.P. Revenue Code, an order was passed by the Chief Revenue Officer on 10.09.2024 which has been challenged before the respondent no. 1 under Section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 in Revision No. 1838 of 2025. The aforesaid revision has not yet been admitted, as such, the petitioner is seeking a direction from this Court that respondent no. 1 to decide the aforesaid revision.

¶14

In view of the nature of relief claimed by the petitioner, no notice are being issued to private respondent nos. 3 to 7.

¶15

WRIC No. 34253 of 2025

¶16

¶17

Writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 1 to decide the pending revision no. 1838 of 2025 expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of filing of certified copy of this order, after putting all the necessary parties to notice.

¶18

It is made clear that no adjudication has been made on the merits of the case.

¶19

(Arun Kumar,J.)

¶20

September 25, 2025

¶21

A. Mandhani

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK MANDHANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anoop Kumar v. Commissioner Prayagraj Division Prayagraj and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop Kumar v. Commissioner Prayagraj Division Prayagraj and 6 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