Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 162240 (ALL)

SUMITRA DEVI AND 4 OTHERS v. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE TAHSIL IKAUNA DISTT. SHRAWASTI AND 4 OTHERS

WRIC/8686/2025 · 2025-09-08

Brij Raj Singh, Sangeeta Chandra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 8686 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel who appears on behalf of the State-respondent no.1 and Shri Pankaj Gupta, who appears on behalf of the Land Management Committee of the Gaon Sabha concerned. 2. This petition has been filed by the petitioners for the following prayers:- "1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 2 (Tehsildar, Ikauna, District Shravasti) and other revenue authorities to implement the orders dated 12.05.2015. 31.10.2013, and 30.09.2010 passed by the consolidation authorities. II. Direct the Respondents to mutate and record the names of the Petitioner as legal heirs of Late Suresh @ Vijay Kumar Choudhary in Khata Nos. 484 and 561, Village Khargaura, Pargana & Tahsil Ikauna, District Shravasti. III. Issue a writ, order or direction restraining the respondents from making any unauthorised alterations in favour of the private respondents. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amresh Singh, Pawan Kumar Yadav, Shitla Prasad Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta Sumitra Devi And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) Sub Divisional Magistrate Tahsil Ikauna Distt. Shrawasti And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) IV. Pass such other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. V. Allow the writ petition with cost in favour of the Petitioners." 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the consolidation operation has been concluded and the orders passed by the Consolidation Authority has become final. The Revenue Authorities are bound to perform their ministerial duty of making corrections in revenue entries in the Revenue Records thereafter. However, the Revenue Authorities are not complying with the orders passed by the Consolidation Authorities and have mutated the names of private-respondents in Khata No.484 in collusion with the private respondents. 4. The Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents has pointed out that it appears that the private-respondent has filed Writ Petition No.504 (Cons.) of 2015 [Suresh Chandra Chaudhary & 3 Others Vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation and 3 others] before this Court where this Court while issuing notice to the private-respondents has directed them to complete the pleadings and in the meantime, directed status-quo as existing on today between the parties over the land in question shall be maintained. This interim order dated 15.07.2015 is operating and the respondents Revenue Authorities have not complied the order passed by the Court. 5. This writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court in Writ Petition No.504 (Cons.) of 2015 [Suresh Chandra Chaudhary & 3 Others Vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation and 3 others] praying for vacation of interim order. September 8, 2025 N.PAL WRIC No. 8686 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- NARESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- NARESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench