HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 9234 of 2023 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. The writ Court on 25.04.2023 while disposing of Writ-C No. 13772 of 2023 passed the following order: "Heard Sri Ali Husan learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel who appears for respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 and Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi who appears for respondent No. 4. In view of the order which is being proposed to be passed today, notices are not being issued to respondents No. 5 to 7. The case of the writ petitioner is that he along with his brother Suresh, Dinesh Kumar, Kamlesh, Jiledar and Basanti are recorded owners of plot No. 156 area 0.0240 hectares and plot No. 163 area 0.0080 hectares situate in Village Rampur Khas Pargana and Tehsil Mariyahun, District Jaunpur. In support of the said contention the Khatauni of the fasli year 1428/1433 have been annexed as Annexure 1. According to the writ petitioner he preferred proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue code, 2006 on 14.10.2022 for demarcation of the boundaries of plot No. 156 area 0.0240 hectares and plot No. 163 area 0.0080 hectares. The third respondent, Up-Zila Adhikari Mariyahun, District Jaunpur consequent to obtaining of the report from the Tehsildar concerned thereafter proceeded to pass an order dated 16.02.2023 which according to the writ petitioner is in his favour. It is further the submission of the writ petitioner that the stones were also affixed on the plot in question by the Revenue Inspector. In support of the said contention the reference has Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ali Hasan, Istiyaq Ali Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Jiledar .....Applicant(s) Kunal Gaurav, Up-Ziladhikari .....Opposite Party(s) been made at page 33 of the paper book which happens to be the order of the third respondent dated 16.02.2023 under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code as well as the spot memo at page 36 of the paper book. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has further invited the attention of the Court towards page 40 so as to contend that a report of affixation of the stones is already there on record dated 24.03.2023. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code has been decided in favour of the writ petitioner stones have been also affixed but possession has not been delivered. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner on the strength of the statutory provisions contained under sub-clause (b) read with sub-section (2) of Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has submitted that it is always open for the Sub-Divisional Officer while determining the boundaries to even restore the possession to the land owner who is entitled for the said benefit. Prayer in the present petition is for a direction to the third respondent to deliver the possession of the plots in question and in alternative to decide the application of the writ petitioner dated 05.04.2023 which has been appended as Annexure 7 at page 41/43 reference whereof has been made in para 6 of the writ petition. Learned Standing Counsel as well as the counsel appearing for the Gaon Sabha, on the other hand, submits that since the private respondents No. 5 to 7 are not before the Court and further it is not ascertainable as to whether the proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code emanating from the order dated 16.02.2023 of the third respondent has been carried in appeal or not thus according to him the best course available would be to direct the third respondent to decide the application of the writ petitioner which is stated to be filed and pending since 05.04.2023. It is further the stand of the learned counsel for the respondent that no fruitful purpose will be served in detaining the writ petitioner, however according to them they do not propose to file any counter affidavit. Considering the submission of the rival parties as well as the stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed of granting liberty to the writ petitioner to prefer a fresh application before the third respondent, Up- CAPL No. 9234 of 2023 2 Zila Adhikari Mariyahun, Distict Jaunpur annexing the self-attested copy of the writ petition pressing his claim and cause strictly after complying with the provisions contained under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, and on the said application being preferred by the writ petitioner the third respondent shall proceed to decide the same strictly in accordance with law. It is further provided that the third respondent before proceeding to decide the claim of the writ petitioner shall also advert to the crucial fact as to whether the proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code has attained finality or not or it has been carried to before the appellate forum by means of filing of the appeal by the private respondent. The entire exercise should be done strictly in accordance with law after hearing the parties subject to legal impediment, if any, within a period of two months. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of." 2. In the compliance affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party, in para 9, it has been stated that against the order passed by the S.D.M. on 16.02.2023 and thereafter, in restoration application on 17.07.2023, the respondent no. 5 in the said case had preferred an appeal under Section 24(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which is pending consideration. 3. As the appeal against the said order is pending consideration, no case for contempt is made out. 4. The present contempt application stands dismissed directing the Additional Commissioner-Ist, Varanasi Division, Varanasi to decide the appeal pending under Section 24(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within three months, if it has not been decided till date. 5. Contempt notice stands discharged. May 14, 2026 A. V. Singh CAPL No. 9234 of 2023 3 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- AJAY VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad