Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9532 Court No. - 8 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10983 of 2024 Petitioner :- Waquar Ahmad ( Waqwar Ahamd In Adahar Card ) And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Faisal Ahmad Khan,Abdul Muqeem,Km. Priya,Mohd. Qasim Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey,Jai Prakash Mishra,Sudhanshu Chauhan Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing counsel for the State respondent as well as Sri Sudhanshu Chauhan learned counsel for the private respondent nos.4 and 5 the contesting parties. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties the petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself. The order under challenge is dated 13.06.2024 passed by the respondent no.2 in an appeal arising out of proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The sole ground of challenge is that the statutory appeal was filed by the private respondent nos.4 and 5 before the respondent no.2 against the order dated 15.04.2024. It is urged that the said appeal was time barred, however, the respondent no.2 without issuing notice under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and even without calling upon the petitioners to respond at the admission stage itself allowed the appeal of the private respondent by means of the order 28.11.2024. It is submitted that this is completely in derogation of the jurisdiction vested with the first appellate court in as much as at once it was noticed that the appeal was barred by limitation, it was incumbent upon the appellate authority to have issued notice and only after having condoned the delay after hearing the parties only then it could have entered into merits of the appeal and could decide it. Sri Sudhanshu Chauhan learned counsel for the private respondents has very fairly submitted that in so far as the proposition of law is concerned, there is no dispute. Considering the aforesaid fact, it is not disputed between the parties, apparently order dated 28.11.2024 cannot be sustained. The impugned order dated 28.11.2024 is set aside. The appeal shall stand restored on the Board of the respondent no.2 where the parties shall appear on 03.03.2025. The petitioners shall be at liberty of filing their objections both to the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act as well as on merits of the appeal. The first appellate court shall after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties but without granting any unnecessary adjournment shall first consider the issue of delay and thereafter in case, if it finds favour in condoning the delay only then the appeal may be heard on merits. It is made clear that the Court has not examined the plea of either of the parties on merit and the court concerned shall decide the matter strictly in accordance with law. With the aforesaid, the petition is allowed. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Harshita Digitally signed by :- HARSHITA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- HARSHITA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench