Ram Khelawan vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 17 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ram Khelawan vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 17 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief granted at this stage. Notice ordered to opposite parties no. 8 to 17; petitioner directed to take steps within a week both ways and file affidavit of service within two weeks thereafter annexing the Speed Post tracking report; matter listed fresh on 25.09.2025 showing Sri Ravindra Pandey as counsel for opposite party no. 18.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the State officials (opposite parties nos. 2 to 6) to comply with the judgement and order dated 27.02.1989 passed by the Additional District Judge, District Pratapgarh in Civil Appeal No. 14 of 1984 (Ram Adhar and others v. Ram Sundar and others), and directing the District Magistrate, Superintendent of Police, SDM, Tehsildar and SHO, Pratapgarh to restrain private opposite parties nos. 15 to 18 from making construction on the land decreed in favour of the petitioner.

Key takeaways

The Court directed that notice be issued to opposite parties no. 8 to 17. (Interlocutory procedural direction; no substantive issue decided.)¶14
The petitioner was directed to take steps within a week both ways and file an affidavit of service within two weeks thereafter, annexing the tracking report of the Speed Post. (Interlocutory procedural direction.)¶15
The matter was listed on 25.09.2025 as fresh, showing the name of Sri Ravindra Pandey as counsel for opposite party no. 18. (Interlocutory procedural direction.)¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 2 - Writ - C No. 8845 of 2025 (Ram Khelawan v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Home and 17 others) - interim order dated September 11, 2025 (Sangeeta Chandra and Brij Raj Singh, JJ.). The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing State officials (opposite parties nos. 2 to 6) to comply with the judgement and order dated 27.02.1989 passed by the Additional District Judge, District Pratapgarh in Civil Appeal No. 14 of 1984 (Ram Adhar and others v. Ram Sundar and others), and directing the District Magistrate, SP, SDM, Tehsildar and SHO (Antu), Pratapgarh to restrain private opposite parties nos. 15 to 18 from constructing on the land decreed in the petitioner's favour. The Court heard counsel, took on record the power filed by Sri Ravindra Pandey for opposite party no. 18, ordered notice to opposite parties nos. 8 to 17, directed the petitioner to complete service formalities (steps within a week both ways; affidavit of service with Speed Post tracking report within two weeks), and listed the matter fresh for 25.09.2025. Purely interlocutory; no substantive determination, no statute cited, no ratio laid down.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

WRIT - C No. - 8845 of 2025

Ram Khelawan

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 17 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rakesh Kumar Modanwal Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 2

HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of the Sateopposite parties no.1 to 7 and Sri Ravindra Pandey, learned counsel, who has filed power on behalf of opposite party no.18, which is taken on record.

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

"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing to the opposite party (State officials) no.2, 3, 4 5 and 6 to comply with judgement and order dated 27.02.21989 in complete respect passed by Additional District Judge, District Pratapgarh passed in Civil Appeal No.14 fo 1984, Ram Adhar and others Vs. Ram Sundar and others, within the period so stipulated by this Hon’ble Court and further be directed to the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh, Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh, SDM, Sadar, Pratapgarh, Tehsildar, Sadar, Pratapgarh as well as SHOAntu, District Pratapgarh to restrain to the private opposite parties no.15 to 18 to not making illegal construction upon the land which was decreed in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 27.02.1989.”

3. Issue notice to opposite parties no.8 to 17.

Petitioner shall take steps within a week both ways and file an affidavit of service within two weeks thereafter annexing the tracking report of the Speed Post.

WRIC No. 8845 of 2025

2

List this matter on 25.09.2025, as fresh, showing the name of Sri Ravindra Pandey as counsel for opposite party no.18.

(Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.)

September 11, 2025

Rao/-

Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench