Shri Durgaji Inter College Sehda and Another vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shri Durgaji Inter College Sehda and Another vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim protection: until further orders of the Court, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners pursuant to the notice dated 14.01.2026 passed by respondent no.6; matter listed on 26.02.2026 at 12.00 P.M.; respondent no.6 directed to appear in person on the next date with explanation, unless the notice has been withdrawn, in which case only the withdrawal order is to be placed before the Court; Sri Vijay Shankar Prasad, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, directed to communicate the order telephonically to the District Magistrate, Azamgarh.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 14.01.2026 issued by respondent no.6 (Amit Kumar, Lekhpal) directing the petitioners to vacate the premises, without providing notice and opportunity of hearing despite the pendency of a Section 101 U.P. Revenue Code exchange application, is valid in law.

Court's answer

The order of eviction passed in the shape of notice against the petitioners was made without following the procedure prescribed in law.

Ratio / Principle

Such notice is bad in the eyes of law and in complete violation of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Directions in the Matter of Demolition of Structures in Re, (2025) 5 SCC 1, which requires executive action or statutory exercise of power to be bona fide and for maintaining public trust; that requirement is missing in the present case.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under WRIT - C No. 7506 of 2026 (Allahabad High Court, Prakash Padia, J., decided February 24, 2026) challenged a notice dated 14.01.2026 issued by Amit Kumar, Lekhpal, Sehda, Tehsil-Sadar, Azamgarh (respondent no.6), directing the petitioner institution (running for 25 years on the disputed land, with a Section 101 U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 exchange application pending) to vacate the premises within a week. The Court found that an order of eviction had been passed in the shape of a notice without following the procedure prescribed in law and without opportunity of hearing, and held it bad in law and in complete violation of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Directions in the Matter of Demolition of Structures in Re, (2025) 5 SCC 1, which requires executive or statutory action to be bona fide and for maintaining public trust. Until further orders, no coercive action was permitted pursuant to the notice; respondent no.6 was directed to appear in person with explanation on the next date (26.02.2026) unless the notice was withdrawn, and the Additional Chief Standing Counsel was directed to communicate the order to the District Magistrate, Azamgarh.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 7506 of 2026

Shri Durgaji Inter College Sehda And Another

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 5 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anand Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla

Court No. - 6

HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

The notice dated 14.01.2026 issued to the petitioner by Amit Kumar, Lekhpal, Sehda, Tehsil-Sadar, Azamgarh/respondent no.6 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

It is argued by counsel for the petitioners that on the land in dispute institution of the petitioners are running since last 25 years and an application for exchange of land under Section 101 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending consideration before the authorities inspite of the same without providing notice and opportunity notice impugned dated 14.01.2026 was issued by Amit Kumar, Lekhpal, directing the petitioner to vacate the premises within a week otherwise legal proceedings will be initiated against the petitioners. It is further argued that though the caption of the aforesaid order is notice but no opportunity of hearing has been provided to the petitioners by the aforesaid notice.

From perusal of the record it transpires that the order of eviction has been passed in the shape of notice against the petitioners without following the procedure prescribed in law.

After going through the same, the Court is more than satisfied that such kind of notice is not only bad in the eyes of law but also in complete violation of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Directions in the Matter of Demolition of Structures in Re reported in (2025) 5 SCC Page 1 in which it has been held that executive action or statutory exercise of power be executive must be bona fide and for

WRIC No. 7506 of 2026

2

maintaining public trust. This fact is missing in the present case.

It is very fairly argued by learned Standing Counsel that they will try that respondent no.6 will withdraw the aforesaid order and place the order of withdrawal on the next date fixed in the matter.

List on 26.02.2026. The matter will be taken up at 12.00 P.M. Until further orders of this Court, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners pursuant to the notice dated 14.01.2026 passed by the respondent no.6.

The respondent no.6-Amit Kumar, Lekhpal, who passed the aforesaid order is directed to appear in person on the next date fixed in the matter along-with explanation, however, in case notice has been withdrawal he need not to appear in person and only order should be placed before this Court.

Sri Vijay Shankar Prasad, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel is directed to communicate over telephone regarding the order passed today to the District Magistrate, Azamgarh for further communication.

(Prakash Padia,J.)

February 24, 2026 Pramod Tripathi

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