Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10523 (ALL)

PANKAJ KUMAR AND 4 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIC/2312/2025 · 2025-02-10

Manish Kumar Nigam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20358 Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2312 of 2025 Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vishal Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kaushal Kishore Mani Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed seeking following relief :- "Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the records and quashing the impugned order dated 28.11.2024 passed by the 2nd Additional Commissioner (Finance) Saharanpur in Case No. 1008 of 2023 (Computer Case No. C202309000001008) (Dharamveer Nagpal Vs. Pankaj and others) arising out of Section 207/38 (4) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. II. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus stay the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 28.11.2024 passed by the 2nd Additional Commissioner (Finance) Saharanpur in Case No. 1008 of 2023 (Computer Case No. C202309000001008) (Dharamveer Nagpal Vs. Pankaj and others) arising out of Section 207 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, during the pendency of the present writ petition before this Hon'ble Court." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that an application was filed by respondent No.5 under Section 38 which was decided by order dated 1.8.2023 directing that name of petitioners and respondents be recorded as co-tenure holder. Against the order dated 1.8.2023, respondent No.5 filed an appeal and the same has been allowed and the matter has been remanded to the S.D.M. concerned to decide afresh. 4. Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the Gaon Sabha have submitted that firstly petitioners have an alternative remedy to challenge the aforesaid order by way of filing a revision under Section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2016 or petitioners may also contest the case as after the remand the original proceedings are still pending. 5. In view of the same, I am not inclined to interfere with the matter. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to either avail alternative remedy or to contest the matter before the original authority, in accordance with law. Order Date :- 11.2.2025 Rishabh [Manish Kumar Nigam, J.] Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad