RAJENDRA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE LKO. AND 7 OTHERS
WPIL/508/2025 · 2025-07-11
Attau Rahman Masoodi, Shree Prakash Singh
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 137435 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 137435 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39686-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 508 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rajendra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, Sri Dilip Kumary Pandey, counsel for opposite party no. 5.
2. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 30.09.2024 passed by opposite party no. 3 in Case No. 977 of 2023(Kayyum Ansari Vs State of U.P. under section 38(1) of U.P. Revenue Code,
2006.
3. It is not in dispute that the proceedings under section 38(1) of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 were initiated by opposite party no. 6 to which the State was a party.
4. On calling the necessary reports from the revenue authorities, the proceedings have finally been decided by order dated
30.09.2024. The correction of map has also been acted upon in furtherance of the order passed by the Upper Collector(F&R), Hardoi.
5. On perusal of the order passed by the revenue court, it is gathered that the revenue map was sought to be corrected on the premise that the same was not prepared having regard to the total area of Gata No. 1179 measuring 0.2020 hectares. The Revenue Authorities, on due application of mind and by calling for necessary reports have corrected the error and the order passed by the revenue court has already been acted upon by the State
6. In these circumstances, doubting the legality of the order passed by the revenue court in a PIL, in our humble
consideration, is not permissible. The writ petition being devoid of merit, is dismissed. (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) (A.R. Masoodi,J.)
Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Mayank Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench