RAM PRAKASH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. REVENUE DEPTT. LKO. AND 5 OTHERS
WRIC/6148/2025 · 2025-06-30
Alok Mathur, Shree Prakash Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 148228 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 148228 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36810-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6148 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Prakash Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Harendra Singh,Satish Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
1. Vakalatnama filed by Sri Rajkumar Pandey, Advocate on behalf of respondent no. 5 which is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Harendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Raj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 5 as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
3. In view of the proposed order, issuance of notice to private respondent no. 6 is dispensed with.
4. By means of present petition, it is submitted that the petitioner has a share in Gata No. 1357, situated at village Kachnaaw (Jagdishpur), Tehsil Musafirkhana, District Amethi. It has been submitted that by an application submitted by respondent nos. 5 and 6, their names have been entered in the revenue records and they are trying to dispossess the petitioner and in view of the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner has prayed for direction to the State-respondents to restrain illegal interference of respondent nos. 5 and 6 with regard to share of the petitioner in Gata No. 1357.
5. The petition has vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the State-respondents and he has submitted that the petitioner has an adequate and efficacious remedy for filing a Civil Suit against the private respondents and seeking an injunction against them.
6. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties as well as the dispute raised in the present case for which the petitioner has an adequate and efficacious remedy and seeking injunction against the private respondents, such dispute is not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, it is provided that in case the petitioner moves a Civil Suit
alongwith an application for temporary injunction, within next two weeks, the trial court shall pass appropriate orders with expedition.
7. Subject to the observation made herein-above, the petition is dismissed. [Shree Prakash Singh,J.] [Alok Mathur,J.] Order Date :- 30.6.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench