Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 151566 (ALL)

RAM SINGAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT., LKO. AND OTHERS

WRIC/6690/2025 · 2025-07-16

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40600 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6690 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Singar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Meva Lal Yadav,Harshita Gupta,Saddam Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri M. L. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and the Standing counsel on behalfof the respondents. 2. It has been submitted that a suit under Section 229 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act was filed by the petitioner seeking declaration with regard to gata No.132 Min. area 0-11-0, situated in Village Naurhanirampur, Pargana Bidhar, Tehsil Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar with prayer to change the entry existing in the name Gaon Sabha and to record name of the petitioner. Admittedly for the said land suit proceedings was allowed on 18.10.1995 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar and it is in aforesaid circumstances that the present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to record name of the petitioner as Bhumidhari land in the revenue records. 3. Learned Standing counsel, on the basis of the instructions received from Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar has produced before this Court an order dated 22.11.2023 where in case No.601/2009-10, computerized case No.T201604040303943 passed by Sub Divisional Officer (Tehsil Level), Judicial, Tanda, Ambedkar Nagar has been dismissed for want of prosecution. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he was not aware of the said proceedings and consequently could not know the said order. 5. After arguing the matter at some length learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file appropriate authority by moving application for recall or file a petition, if so advised. 6. In case application for recall is filed within two weeks, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously 7. Subject to aforesaid observation, the petition is dismissed as not pressed. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 16.7.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench