Disposed¶9

Chandrsen Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 8 Others

Allahabad HC19 Aug 2025WRIC/7830/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WRIT-C 7830 of 2025; Chandrsen Singh v. State of U.P.; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; order 19.08.2025; Sangeeta Chandra; Brij Raj Singh; Bahraich; Shravasti; Chief Judicial Magistrate order 19.11.2014; Sessions Judge order 27.04.2022; revision remand 31.03.2014; gata no.895/4 Ka; mauja Matadeen Singh purwa; illegal possession; release of impounded property; mandamus; compliance instructions District Magistrate Shravasti; late Sunil Kumar Rai; compensation prayer; listed fresh 22.08.2025; interim order.

What did the court decide?

No final relief granted; Learned Standing Counsel directed to seek instructions from the District Magistrate, Shravasti on compliance with the orders dated 19.11.2014 and 27.4.2022, and the matter was listed fresh on 22.08.2025. ¶9

Chandrsen Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 8 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7830 of 2025 Petitioner :- Chandrsen Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sandeep Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶4

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of State-opposite party Nos.1 to 4.

¶5

2. This petition has been filed with the following prayers :-

¶6

"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties, particularly opposite party no.2 to 4 to take proper and effective action for removing illegal possession over the land bearing gata no.895/4 Ka, area- 2.148 heq., situated at mauja- Matadeen Singh purwa, Imaliyaganj, Police Station- Payagpur, Pargana, Tehseel & District- Bahraich.

¶7

II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties, particularly opposite party no.2 to handover the land to petitioner from the illegal possession of opp. no.5 to 9 as per direction of order dated 19.11.14 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shravasti in Case No.1092/12/13.

¶8

III. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties no.5 to 9 to pay compensation to petitioner for illegal using and earning from his parental agricultural land after 19.11.2014."

¶9

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner, along with another person, was falsely implicated in a criminal case and the petitioner's property was impounded as one of the accused was declared an absconder. The property in question, after its impounding on 20.01.2000, was handed over to late Sunil Kumar Rai, who was the real brother of opposite party No.5, father of opposite party Nos.6 and 7 and uncle of opposite party Nos.8 and 9.

¶10

4. The petitioner and accused person face trial and a criminal appeal was filed, in which the petitioner was released on bail.

¶11

5. Since the impounding of the property was caused due to one of the accused being absconding and the said absconder later returned, faced trial and was convicted, an application was moved before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shravasti for releasing of the property, which was still in possession of the late Sunil Kumar Rai. Upon such application, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shravasti did not pass any order. Consequently, a revision was filed before the Sessions Judge, Shravasti, who, by order dated 31.03.2014, remanded the matter for reconsideration to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

¶12

6. On 19.11.2014, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shravasti directed to release of the property in favour of the petitioner and his brothers. However, this order is not being complied with and opposite party Nos.5 to 9, who have no legal right over the land, continue to retain possession.

¶13

7. Opposite party No.5 had, in fact, filed a revision against the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, which was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Shravasti on 27.04.2022. Nevertheless, opposite party Nos.5 to 9 continue to hold property illegally. Hence this petition.

¶14

8. Learned Standing Counsel shall seek instructions from the District Magistrate, Shravasti regarding compliance with the order dated 19.11.2014 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shravasti and the order dated 27.4.2022 passed by Sessions Judge, Shravasti.

¶15

9. List this matter on 22.08.2025 as fresh.

¶16

Order Date :- 19.8.2025/Shubhankar

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Chandrsen Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrsen Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Uma Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Rural Development Lko. and 9 Others

Punam Tiwari and Another vs District Magistrate,Lucknow and 2 Others

Sharjeel Rahman vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 5 Others

Smt. Uma Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Rural Development Lko. and 9 Others

Rajendra Prasad and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of P.W.D. Lko. and 3 Others

M/S Sawariya Enterprises Thru. Proprietor Surya Kant Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of GST Tax Lko and 2 Others