Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 159317 (ALL)

WASIF ALI v. COMMISSIONER, LUCKNOW DIVISION, LUCKNOW AND OTHERS

A227/4958/2025 · 2025-08-22

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:49468 Court No. - 5 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4958 of 2025 Petitioner :- Wasif Ali Respondent :- Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shamshad Ahmad Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anand Kumar Tripathi Hon'ble Alok Mathur, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing counsel for the State respondents while notice on behalf of respondent No.2 has been accepted by Sri Anand Kumar Tripathi. 2. In view of the proposed order notice to private respondents is dispensed with. 3. Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been filed with the prayer to direct the opposite party No.1 to decide the stay application filed by the petitioner in revision under section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code bearing Revision No.4586 of 2024, computerized No. C 2024 10000004586 "Wasif Ali and Another Vs. Smt. Washiyan Begum" expeditiously. 4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in the revision preferred by the petitioner under Section 207 of U.P. Revenue Code 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. 5. Learned State counsel does not oppose the aforesaid prayer. 6. Accordingly, considering the aforesaid submissions the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 i.e. Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow to consider and decide the application for interim relief with expedition, say within six weeks from the date service has been effected on the respondents, in case there is no legal impediment. 7. In case, it is not possible to decide the same within the time prescribed above, he shall decide the same within two weeks thereafter. 8. 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 :- 22.8.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench