RAJENDRA PRASAD AND 3 OTHERS v. ADDL. COMMISSIONER ADMINISTRATIVE AYODHYA AND 4 OTHERS
/5790/2025 · 2025-09-23
Jaspreet Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 167143 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 167143 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5790 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner prays for the following main reliefs:
" (i) to direct the learned Additional Commissioner (Administration), Ayodhya Mandal, Ayodhya to take decision upon the interim relief application dated 24.03.2025 filed by the petitioners along with Suit No. 695/2025 (Computerized Case No. 20250400000695); Rajendra Prasad and Others Vs. Ramashankar and Others, under Section 27(4), Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, which is pending before him, expeditiously, within stipulated time period. (ii) to direct the respondents to maintain status-quo over the land in question, till disposal of interim relief application dated 24.03.2025. "
3. Having considered the said prayer and from the averments as made in the present petition, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition nor does it find that there are any accentuating circumstances to expedite the matter at this stage, accordingly, leaving it open for the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the court concerned. Needless to say, in case if such an application is made, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the Authority concerned in accordance with law. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Piyush Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Rajendra Prasad And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) Addl. Commissioner Administrative Ayodhya And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
4. It is also made clear that the mere dismissal of the writ petition may not come in the way of the petitioners in case if any cause for expedition arises in future.
5. With the aforesaid, the petition is dismissed. September 23, 2025 Asheesh A227 No. 5790 of 2025 2 (Jaspreet Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHEESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench