Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 148511 (ALL)

C/M RAMA SHANKAR TIWARI INTER COLLEGE PRATAPGARH THRU. ITS MANAGER RAMA SHANKAR TIWARI AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS ADDL. CHIEF SECY./PRIN. SECY.DEPTT. OF REVENUE LKO. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIC/6213/2025 · 2025-07-03

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37680 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6213 of 2025 Petitioner :- C/M Rama Shankar Tiwari Inter College Pratapgarh Thru. Its Manager Rama Shankar Tiwari And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy.Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Shukla,Alok Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 as well as Sri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5/Gram Sabha. 2. By means of this petition, the petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 05.05.2025 passed by the Chief Revenue Officer, Pratapgarh/respondent No.3, thereby rejecting the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 30 of U. P. Revenue Code for correction of maps. 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the land bearing Gata No. 235-ka measuring 0.314 hectares, situated at Village Raith, Gram Panchayat Hulasgarh, Tehsil Lalganj (Ajhara), District Pratapgarh is recorded under the name of the institution run by the petitioner namely Rama Shankar Tiwari Inter College, Pratapgarh. 4. It has further been stated that the building of the said institution has been established in the year 2013 while in the revenue records, the land of the petitioner is indicated as Gata No. 235. It is in the aforesaid circumstances that an application under Section 30 of the U. P. Revenue Code was preferred before the Chief Revenue Officer, District Pratapgarh. 5. From the material placed by the petitioner, including the revenue records, it is clear that Gata No. 235 is Minjumla containing Gata No. 235-ka as well as Gata No. 235-kha and until and unless the partition proceedings are carried out, for which the specific provision is provided for under Section 30(2) of the U. P. Revenue Code, no action can be taken for correction of maps and accordingly the Chief Revenue Officer, Pratapgarh has declined to interfere in the application of the petitioner directing him to move an appropriate application under Section 30(2) of the U. P. Revenue Code and only after appropriate orders are passed thereof with regard to the partition of Gata No. 235, necessary exercise of modification of maps can be carried out. 6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the only grievance raised by the petitioner is that the private respondents are unauthorizingly raising constructions and only because the partition has not been carried out, no restraining order has been passed by the respondent authorities and accordingly submits that there is urgency in the matter and prays that he may be permitted to move an application under Section 30(2) of the U. P. Revenue Code and direct the respondent authorities to consider and decide the same with expedition. In the aforesaid circumstances, he would not press the other prayers made in the writ petition assailing the impugned order. 7. Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 do not oppose the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move an appropriate application under Section 30(2) of U. P. Revenue Code, which is directed to be considered and decided with expedition within the time frame prescribed in the statute, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. shall also be open to the petitioner to move the application for interim relief and in case such an application is moved before the authority concerned, he shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, within a period of 10 days thereafter, in accordance with law, in case there is no legal impediment. 10. With the aforesaid directions, the petitioner is disposed of. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 (Manoj K.) (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench