Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 162979 (ALL)

RAVINDRA KUMAR DWIVEDI AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT., LKO. AND OTHERS

WRIC/8721/2025 · 2025-09-16

Manjive Shukla

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 8721 of 2025 Court No. - 30 HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for Respondents No. 1 to 4. 3. In view of the order proposed, notice to Respondent No. 5 is hereby dispensed with. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, after arguing at some length, has confined his prayer to the extent that the Petitioner No. 2 has already filed an application for recall of the order dated 16.02.2024 passed by the Tehsildar (Judicial), Kadipur, Sultanpur in Case No. 2365 of 2022, Ravindra Kumar and Others Vs. Shripati, therefore, a direction may be issued by this Court for disposal of the said application, expeditiously, within a fixed time frame. 5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents does not have any objection if direction is issued to Respondent No. 3 to consider and decide the application for recall of the order dated 16.02.2024 filed in Case No. 2365 of 2022, within a fixed time frame. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties and I find that the petitioners' limited prayer is innocuous in nature. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dilip Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ravindra Kumar Dwivedi And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Respondent No. 3 to consider and decide the application for recall of the order dated 16.02.2024 pending in the Case No. 2365 of 2022, within two months from the presentation of certified copy of this order. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that crop sown by the petitioners on the land in question, is standing and they would be able to cut the crop by the end of November, 2025. 9. Since, it is a question of standing crop, therefore, it is provided that till the end of November, 2025, no interference shall be shown in regard to the standing crop of the petitioners on the land in question. September 16, 2025 Anurag WRIC No. 8721 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench