Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14017-DB Court No. - 9 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2275 of 2025 Petitioner :- Achche Lal Yadav Respondent :- Distt. Magistrate / Collector, Barabanki And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Shukla,Shyam Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the State Respondents. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "(a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to interfere for cut/removing the crops of the petitioner, situated over the Gata No.585, 633, 635, 988, 995 and 998 in Village- Patulki, Pargana- Dariyabad, Tehsil-Ramsanehighat, District- Barabanki, in the interest of justice. (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to allow the petitioner for removing the crops situated over Gata No.585,633, 988, 995 and 998 in Village- Patulki, Pargana- Dariyabad, Tehsil- Ramsanehighat, District- Barabanki, in the interest of justice." 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had taken a loan of Rs. 5 lakhs from the Bank of India, Tikait Nagar Branch at Barabanki in the year 2019 under the Kisan Credit Card. The petitioner could not deposit the amount and the Bank issued a Recovery Certificate of Rs.12,28,246/- and the Tehsil Authorities issued a Recovery Citation thereafter. The petitioner approached this Court in a writ petition challenging such Recovery Citation. The Court was pleased to provide the relief to the petitioner directing him to deposit Rs.2,50,000/- itself within a period of six weeks and then the remaining amount would be recovered in easy installments. The petitioner could not deposit the amount as directed by the Court. He again filed a writ petition bearing Writ-C No.9324 of 2024: Achche Lal Yadav Vs. State of U.P., for quashing the order dated 03.07.2024 which was passed for recovery of the loan amount. The petitioner's writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution on 25.10.2024. The petitioner thereafter moved a recall application on 04.11.2024, which is pending. 4. In the meantime, the petitioner had sown his crops over the land in question, but the Tehsil Authorities are preventing him from harvesting the crops, therefore, he has approached this Court in the instant writ petition. 5. Learned Standing Counsel has pointed out from the contents of the writ petition that it is a third writ petition filed by the petitioner relating to the recovery of the same loan. The first petition filed by the petitioner was entertained by learned Single Judge bearing Writ-C No.7333 of 2024:Achche Lal Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and the order was passed on 30.08.2024 directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 2,50,000/- within a period of six weeks i.e. latest by 15.10.2024 and on deposition of such amount, the recovery proceedings were to remain stayed till such time that all the quarterly installments of the remaining amount were deposited. The Court made it clear that in case the petitioner violates any of the conditions mentioned in the order dated 30.08.2024, the Bank shall be at liberty to initiate recovery proceedings. Thereafter, the petitioner filed another writ petition and this is the third writ petition. 6. We find from a perusal of the instructions sent by the Tehsildar, Ram Sanehi Ghat, Barabanki, that the Tehsil Authorities have proceeded in view of the liberty granted to the Bank by the order of the Court dated 30.08.2024. 7. Instructions are kept on record. 8. Only because the relief clause in the writ petition has been cleverly drafted, a third writ petition for the same cause of action cannot be said to be maintainable. 9. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 7.3.2025 Rahul Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench