RADHEY SHYAM v. BOARD OF REVENUE, U.P. LUCKNOW THRU. CHAIRMAN AND OTHERS
WRIB/1075/2023 · 2025-05-01
Saurabh Lavania
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 169371 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 169371 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25234 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1075 of 2023 Petitioner :- Radhey Shyam Respondent :- Board Of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Prasad Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned State Counsel and perused the material available on record.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking the following main relief:-
"i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 3.10.2023, 9.8.1988 and 23.03.1987 passed by the opp. party no.1, 2 and 3 as contained in Annexure No.1 to 3 to this writ petition in the interest of justice."
3. On being confronted after taking note of the facts of the case including that father of the petitioner namely Chhote Lal appeared as witness in the mutation case, which is apparent from the impugned order dated 23.03.1987 passed in Mutation Case No.10/28/287 (Pankaj Kumar Vs. Ram Lal) as also from the impugned order dated 09.08.1988 passed by Additional Officer -Ist, Bahraich in Appeal no.133/31/17, and accordingly was well aware with the mutation proceedings and in his life time he never claimed rights over the property in issue, as also the explanation given in the application seeking condonation of delay in filing the revision challenging the order dated 23.03.1987 and 09.08.1988 and further, the genuineness of 'Will', the basis of orders impugned, can be adjudicated in regular proceeding, the learned counsel for the petitioner says that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file the regular proceedings in terms of Section 40-A of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (in short 'Act 1901) (now repealed) and Section 39 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (in short 'Code 2006').
4. Taking note of the aforesaid as also the reasons shown for considering the delay, which are completely misconceived and bogus, as appears from the aforesaid, this Court is of the view that the orders impugned herein are justified and therefore, the present petition is dismissed with liberty as prayed for subject to all legal and factual pleas available. Order Date :- 1.5.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench