M/S UMESH YOGESH LLP THRU. ITS PARTNER AKHILESH PANDEY v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. STATE TAX LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
WRIC/2413/2025 · 2025-03-11
Om Prakash Shukla, Rajan Roy
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 127983 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 127983 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14855-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2413 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Umesh Yogesh Llp Thru. Its Partner Akhilesh Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. State Tax Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.
1. Heard.
2. The petitioner had purchased a land/cinema hall by a sale deed, which had been executed by the U.P. Chal Chitra Nigam Limited in 2005, copy of which is annexed as Annexure No.4 to the writ petition. Now, he wants that the District Magistrate should execute a lease deed in respect of the said cinema hall in favour of the petitioner. The basis of the claim is that the property on which the cinema hall was constructed by U.P. Chal Chitra Nigam Limited was itself leased out by the Gram Sabha to the U.P. Chal Chitra Nigam Limited.
3. Be that as it may, these are not matters to be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India especially as
learned Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to satisfy us as to how, if once in respect of the same property, sale deed has been executed in favour of the petitioner, a lease deed could be executed in favour of the petitioner that too by the District Magistrate. The petitioner may avail other remedies or approach the District Magistrate concerned, if there is a cause.
4. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. (Om Prakash Shukla, J.) (Rajan Roy, J.)
Order Date :- 11.3.2025 -Piyush- Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench