RAM CHANDRA AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, HARDOI AND OTHERS
WRIB/759/2025 · 2025-08-12
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 155959 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 155959 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46966 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 759 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Chandra And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Hardoi And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Charan Dixit Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Shyam Charan Dixit, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing counsel for the State- respondents.
2. By means of the instant writ petition the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding Opposite Party No. 3, the Consolidation officer, Tehsil Sadar, Hardoi to forthwith rectify the petitioner's revenue records by removing the incorrect and unauthorized endorsement dated 01.04.2016 made in Akar Patra (For CH- 23), which falsely reflects the applicability of an order passed in Writ Petition No.6063 of 2016, in which the petitioner is neither a party nor affected: II. Further, direct the concerned authorities to restore the petitioner's original land in accordance with the order dated 28.01.2016 passed by the DDC, Hardoi, and to reinstate possession rights over his lawful land in accordance with law, ensuring that no prejudice is caused to him due to the said illegal entry."
3. It is the case of the petitioners that petitioner No.1 is the tenure holder of gata No.939 area 0.1731 hectare while petitioner No.2 is tenure holder of gata No.921 area 0.1135 of gaon sabha Pala, Pargana Gopamau, Tehsil Sadar, District Hardoi and wrongly endorsement has been made in the revenue records of the order of this Court dated 18.3.2016 and accordingly has prayed for suitably amending the revenue records.
4. Learned Standing counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that in writ petition No.6063 (Consolidation), 2016 the orders dated 14.10.2013 and 30.1.2016 were assailed. He further submits that the order dated 30.1.2016 passed by Settlement Officer of Consolidation where the petitioner was also the appellant in appeal No.127 and consequently any orders passed
would affect the land of the petitioner also. He further submits that in case the petitioner wants to demonstrate that he would not be affected by the challenge made of the order dated 18.3.2016 by Smt. Savitri Devi in the Consolidation writ petition No.6063 of 2016 then it is open for him to implead himself as a party and pray for amendment /vacation of the
order dated 18.3.2016.
5. Considering the rival submissions, it is noticed that a coordinate Bench has already passed order dated 18.3.2016 staying the operation of the order dated 14.10.2013. Undoubtedly, in the order dated 14.10.2013 even the appeal preferred by the petitioner was decided and it cannot be said that the order dated 14.10.2013 does not affect the petitioner in any way. Accordingly, this Court would not interfere in the
order passed by the coordinate Bench in Consolidation writ petition No.6063 of 2016.
6. However, it is open for the petitioners to move appropriate application in the pending writ petition and to seek the relief as prayed for in the present writ petition.
7. Subject to aforesaid observations, the petition stands dismissed. (Alok Mathur, J.)
Order Date :- 12.8.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench