VINAY KUMAR AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE LKO AND 3 OTHERS
WRIC/4204/2025 · 2025-05-06
Om Prakash Shukla, Rajan Roy
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 137262 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 137262 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26085-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4204 of 2025 Petitioner :- Vinay Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shresth Agarwal,Salma Bano,Shakti Singh Rathore Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.
1. Heard.
2. Petitioners' Counsel admits to the fact that the second prayer is erroneous, therefore, he does not want to press the same.
3. The petitioners seek disposal of their representation. The grievance is with regard to omission of name of their grandfather from the revenue records sometime in 1379 Fasli as informed by learned Counsel for the petitioners. The remedies in this regard are prescribed in the revenue statutes instead of availing the same, this writ petition has been filed, we, therefore, see no reason to entertain this writ petition.
4. The writ petition is disposed of with liberty as aforesaid. (Om Prakash Shukla, J.) (Rajan Roy, J.) Order Date :- 6.5.2025 -Piyush- Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench