SMT. RAM DULARI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT., LKO. AND 5 OTHERS
A227/4071/2025 · 2025-07-10
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 150437 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 150437 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39539 Court No. - 6 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4071 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Ram Dulari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- S.K. Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri S.K.Tripahi, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Sri Dinesh Kumar Mishra and Sri Divyanshu Mishra, Advocates has accepted notice on behalf of respondent 4.The vakalatnama filed by them is taken on record. 2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been made opposite party in proceedings under Section 35(2) of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 instituted before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Lalganj, Tehsil Lalganj, District Raebareli at the behest of the opposite party No.2. He has further submitted that the petitioner had moved a Caveat Application, but he was not heard at the stage of passing of the interim order on 22.05.2025. He has further submitted that in the said case an application for recall has been preferred by him on 04.06.2025, which is pending consideration. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand submitted that the Caveat was lodged by the petitioner on the same date, but subsequent to the filing of the application, therefore, there is no infirmity in the interim order passed in their favour. 4. In the aforesaid circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer that a suitable direction be given to the respondent No.2 to decide the recall application within a stipulated period. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents do not oppose the innocuous prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Lalganj, Tehsil Lalganj, District Raebareli to decide the application for recall with expedition, say, within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 7.
The parties before this Court have undertaken to cooperate in the proceedings before the respondent No.2-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Lalganj, Tehsil Lalganj, District Raebareli and shall appear before him on the date fixed, so that the application for interim relief preferred by the petitioner can be decided. (Alok Mathur,J.) Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Arvind Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench