Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 115575 (ALL)

TARIQ YUSUF AZIZ AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. REVENUE, LUCKNOW AND OTHERS

WRIB/17/2025 · 2025-02-14

Jaspreet Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Court No. - 8 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 17 of 2025 Petitioner :- Tariq Yusuf Aziz And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anu Pratap Singh,Parvez Akhtar Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prem Shankar,Rama Pati Shukla Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. I.A.No.2 of 2025 1. Heard Shri Anu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Dr. Krishna Singh learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Rama Pati Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.9. 2. The petitioners in the instant petition assail the order dated 24.09.2024 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in Revision No.202 of 24 which was connected with the Revision No.201 of 2024. The Deputy Director of Consolidation by the said order had remanded the matter for deciding the controversy afresh within a period of three months. However, by the time the instant petition came to be filed and could be taken up for some purposeful hearing by them. The Consolidation OfÏcer in pursuance of the order of remand dated 24.09.2024 decided the controversy by means of order dated 15.01.2025. 3. Shri Anu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, at this stage, submits that since the orders have been passed by the Consolidation OfÏcer, the said order now needs to be assailed and for the said reason, he also wishes to bring certain facts on record, hence he may be permitted to withdraw the petition with liberty to file fresh assailing the order passed by the Consolidation OfÏcer which has been passed during pendency of the instant petition. 4. Dr. Krishna Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents submits that the petitioners have not disclosed the correct facts. The array of the parties also suffers from the defect as such there are issues of fraud which are evident from the face of the record and in the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioners may not be granted the liberty to file fresh. 5. He further submits that the petition has been filed through a power of attorney and there is no sembless of any authenticity in so far as the power of attorney is concerned and for this ground also the petition is also not maintainable. 6. Having considered the aforesaid, the basic fact which cannot be disputed is the instant petition was preferred challenging the remand order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. However when the matter came to be taken up on merits for admission, the Consolidation OfÏcer has already passed an order which, of course, at the wisdom of the petitioners can always be challenged either by amending the petition or by filing a fresh. Whether the instant petition can be withdrawn or not i.e. a matter primarily in the hands of the petitioners who is dominus litis. 7. As far as the fact whether the institution of the petition through power of attorney and its validity or any fraud which may have occurred, is a subject which can only be seen once the petition is heard. 8. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the clear view that the petitioners cannot be prevented from withdrawing the petition at this nascent stage when it has not yet been heard on merits for admission and since the order which has now come into being after institution of the petition gives a fresh cause of action and for the aforesaid reason, this Court permits the petitioners to withdraw the petition with liberty to file fresh and assail the order of Consolidation OfÏcer. However, it is provided that whenever the petitioners file the fresh petition a copy of the same shall be provided to Shri Rama Pati Shukla and Shri U. S. Sahai who appears for Sikandar Khan. 9. In view of the aforesaid, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty and it is further noticed that all pleas are available to parties as this Court has not considered any substantive plea on merits except to permit the petitioners to withdraw the above petition with liberty aforesaid. Order Date :- 14.2.2025 ank Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench