VIDYA SAGAR ALIAS TEERATH YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
CMRAD/12/2025 · 2025-01-29
Brij Raj Singh, Rajan Roy
Review Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 118922 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 118922 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:5895-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION DEFECTIVE No. - 12 of 2025 Applicant :- Vidya Sagar Alias Teerath Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Pratap Singh,Avadhesh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J. This is an application for review of our order dated 07.11.2024 passed in Writ-C No.9374 of 2024. We have heard Sri Avadhesh Mishra and Sri Mahendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. On question of delay, the submission was that there is only fifteen days delay and in view of judgment of this Court in Review Petition No.329 of 2010 [Smt. Mohd. Jahan Begum & Anr. vs. Board of Revenue & Ors.] decided on 23.09.2016, separate application has not been filed because there is no limitation prescribed for a review but delay has been explained on affidavit. We have perused the affidavits in this regard and find that the delay has been explained. In any case, the delay is not inordinate and learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the same. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the review application. However, the contention of Mahendra Pratap Singh and Sri Avadesh Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant is that petitioner-applicant had moved an application for issuance of character certificate to the Superintendent of Police although it should have been moved before the District Magistrate as the character certificate was required for obtaining license for sale of liquor. In view of the aforesaid, as the applicant himself had moved an application before the Superintendent of Police who rejected the same on account of pendency of criminal case as is mentioned in our order dated 07.11.2024, therefore, the said error does not
suffer from any error requiring review. However, if appropriate application was to be filed before the District Magistrate then the petitioner/ applicant may do so uninfluenced by our order dated 07.11.2024 whereupon the District Magistrate may get the facts verified and do the needful as per law expeditiously. Accordingly, the review application is disposed of. (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Order Date :- 29.1.2025 Shanu/- Digitally signed by :- SHANU SUMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench