RANIDEVI SATYADEO TRIPATHI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF REVENUE LKO AND 13 OTHERS
WRIC/5309/2025 · 2025-06-05
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 141995 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 141995 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34627-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5309 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ranidevi Satyadeo Tripathi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko And 13 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Prakash Pandey,Dr.Surya Prakash Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Praveen Kumar Giri,J.
1. The petitioner's contention is that in a suit for partition between the petitioner and the co-tenure holder/Opposite Party No.4, status quo order was passed on
26.7.2024. During pendency of the said proceedings, Opposite Party No.4 sold off his share of the land to Opposite Party No.10. However, Opposite Party No.10 exceeding the share purchased by him, took possession of the entire land which is the subject matter of partition proceedings. An application was submitted before the SDM, where the proceedings under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 are pending. Whereupon, he took some action resulting in removal of three pillars, but the other pillars have not been removed. As a result, the Opposite Party No.10 continues to be in possession of land in excess of his share.
2. The application of Opposite Party No.10 for impleadment in the partition proceedings is pending. An F.I.R. is also said to have been lodged. In these circumstances, the SDM who is seized with the proceedings under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 may look into the matter and do the needful, but with expedition to ensure that status quo is not changed by the parties or the Opposite Party No.10 during the pendency of such proceedings, with regard to possession. It is open for the petitioner to initiate such other proceedings as may be permissible in law against Opposite Party No.10.
3. We have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the allegations and counter allegations.
4. With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 5.6.2025 DKS (Praveen Kumar Giri,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR SRIVASTWA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench