Omkar vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Omkar vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim directions only; no final decision on the writ petition. Petitioner directed to appear with a bank draft/banker's cheque of at least Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the District Magistrate, District Pilibhit by 09.02.2026; C.J.M., Pilibhit directed to ensure compliance; Registrar (Compliance) to communicate the order within three days; matter listed on 09.02.2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order of recovery dated 30.12.2024 issued by the Tehsildar, Amariya, District Pilibhit (respondent no.4) is sustainable in law.

Court's answer

From the record it transpires that, in the name of representations/complaints made by the petitioner, the lease-deed amount has not been deposited by him after the first year (2018).

Ratio / Principle

Interim direction: petitioner to appear before the Court with a bank draft/banker's cheque in the name of the District Magistrate, District Pilibhit for at least Rs.1,00,000/- (one lac) by 09.02.2026; the C.J.M., Pilibhit to take steps for compliance; Registrar (Compliance) to communicate the order; matter to be listed on 09.02.2025.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (WRIT - C No. 1539 of 2026, Allahabad High Court, Prakash Padia, J., 29 January 2026) — Interim order. Petitioner, lessee of a pond pursuant to auction (lease deed dated 08.08.2018 for ten years, till 07.08.2028, at Rs.50,000/- per year), challenged a recovery order dated 30.12.2024 issued by the Tehsildar, Amariya, District Pilibhit (respondent no.4) demanding Rs.2 lacs as lease arrears for over four years. The Court recorded that, apart from deposits of Rs.12,500/- and Rs.37,500/- for the first year (2018), the lease amount had not been deposited despite the petitioner's representations/complaints, and directed the petitioner to appear before the Court with a bank draft/banker's cheque of at least Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the District Magistrate, District Pilibhit by 09.02.2026. The C.J.M., Pilibhit was directed to secure compliance and the Registrar (Compliance) to communicate the order within three days. Matter listed on 09.02.2025. No statute or precedent was cited; no final determination on the legality of the recovery order was made.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 1539 of 2026

Omkar

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 4 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Anamika Singh, Jitendra Pal Singh, Pradeep Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Sher Bahadur Singh
Court No.- 6

HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

The order of recovery issued by the Tehsildar, Amariya, District Pilibhit/respondent no.4 dated 30.12.2024 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

It appears from perusal of the writ petition that pursuant to the notification published for auction of a pond, petitioner applied and thereafter a lease deed was executed in favour of the petitioner for a period of ten years, i.e., between 08.08.2018 till 07.08.2028, which was executed on 08.08.2018, copy of which is appended as annexure-2 to the writ petition. Subsequent to the aforesaid, as per terms and conditions of the aforesaid lease deed petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- per year on or before 30th June.

It is stated in paragraph-10 of the writ petition that petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.12500/- on 20.07.2018 and Rs.37500/- on 04.09.2018 for a period of one year. Subsequently an application dated 21.05.2019 was made by the petitioner for necessary demarcation and for construction of embankment.

It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that on the said application instructions were sought for by the revenue authorities in the year 2019 itself.

It is admitted that though the petitioner is doing his fisheries rights pursuant to the lease deed dated 08.08.2018 even today but the amount of

WRIC No. 1539 of 2026

2

the aforesaid lease deed, i.e., Rs.50,000/- per year has not been deposited after one year, i.e., 2018.

In this view of the matter, notice in question has been issued to the petitioner on 30.12.2024 directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/-, total a sum of Rs.2 lacs, which is due for last more than four years.

From perusal of the record it transpires that in the name of representations/complaint made by the petitioner, the amount of lease deed has not been deposited by him.

In this view of the matter, petitioner is directed to appear before this Court along-with a bank draft/banker cheque in the name of District Magistrate, District Pilibhit at least for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (one lac) by 09.02.2026.

The C.J.M., Pilibhit is directed to take necessary steps for compliance of this order in its letter and spirit.

Registrar (Compliance) is directed to communicate copy of this order to the C.J.M., Pilibhit as well as District Magistrate, Pilibhit within three days.

List on 09.02.2025.

(Prakash Padia,J.)

January 29, 2026 Pramod Tripathi

Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad