Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2019 DAILYLAW 2889 (ALL)

KAMLESH KUMAR v. BOARD OF REVENUE, U.P. AT PRAYAGRAJ AND 5 OTHERS

WRIB/2019/2026 · 2026-05-05

Arun Kumar

body2019

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - B No. - 2019 of 2026 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent State. Sri Azad Rai has accepted notice on behalf of Gaon Sabha. 2. The present petition has been filed for the following relief: "(i). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1 to decide the Revision No. 2989 of 2025 (Computerized Case No. AL20250242002989) between the parties "Kamlesh Kumar Vs. Siyambar and others", under Section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, dated 30.06.2025 within a specified period to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court." 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in the aforesaid Revision notices were issued to opposite parties before admitting the revision. The said notices were served and the opposite parties have appeared. The delay in filing the aforesaid revision has been condoned and by the order dated 12.08.2025, the records of the court below have been summoned. A fresh reminder was issued for summoning the records, however, till date the lower court records have not been received by the respondent no. 1. It is further contended that hearing in the aforesaid revision is fixed for 12.05.2026, as such, a direction may be issued to the respondent no. 1 to decided the revision itself after hearing the counsel for the contesting parties. 4. From a perusal of the order-sheet of the aforesaid revision, it is evident Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aprajit Yadav, Krishn Kumar, Shyam Lal Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : Azad Rai, C.S.C. Kamlesh Kumar .....Petitioner(s) Board Of Revenue, U.P. At Prayagraj And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) that the revision has to be heard on its admissibility. The lower court records have not been received till date, therefore, no time frame can be fixed for deciding the aforesaid revision. 5. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no. 1 to hear and decide the admissibility of the aforementioned Revision, in accordance with law, within a period of one month, from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order; and make all endeavours to decide the revision itself, within the time frame as fixed under Rule 183(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, after the records of the court below are received. May 6, 2026 Ranjeet Sahu WRIB No. 2019 of 2026 2 (Arun Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RANJEET SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad