Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 151017 (ALL)

SMT. JANKI DEVI v. BOARD OF REVENUE U.P. LKO. THRU. CHAIRMAN AND OTHERS

A227/4147/2025 · 2025-07-15

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40350 Court No. - 6 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4147 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Janki Devi Respondent :- Board Of Revenue U.P. Lko. Thru. Chairman And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Panna Lal Gupta,Shiv Prasad Chaurasia,Shweta Verma,Subrat Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel for the State respondents and Sri Mohan Singh for respondent No.5-Land Management Committee. 2. Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been filed with following prayer:- "Issue a direction to the opposite party No.1 i.e. Board of Revenue U.P., Lucknow to decide the pending Interim Relief application filed by the petitioner in Revision NO.REV/2211/2025/Amethi (computerized case No.R20250471002211) under Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code (Smt. Janki Devi Vs. Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Ayodhya Mandal, Ayodhya and others), expeditiously within stipulated period as early as possible." 3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the revision preferred by the petitioner has been admitted but no interim order has been passed on the application for interim relief while on the other hand interference is being caused by the respondents on the disputed property for which there is requirement for expeditious disposal of the interim relief application. He further submtis that the respondents have been served. 4. Learned State counsel does not oppose the aforesaid prayer. 5. Accordingly, considering the aforesaid submissions the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider and decided the application for interim relief with expedition, say within next three weeks. 6. In case, it is not possible to decide the same within the time prescribed above, he shall decide the same within two weeks thereafter. 7. It is further provided that in case it is not possible to decide the application for interim relief the respondent No.1 shall consider passing ad interim injunction if a case is so made out. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 15.7.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench