RAJ BAHADUR SINGH AND 5 OTHERS v. STATE OF U. P. AND 3 OTHERS
WRIC/4175/2025 · 2025-02-27
Manish Kumar Nigam
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17297 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17297 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:28129 Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4175 of 2025 Petitioner :- Raj Bahadur Singh And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U. P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi,C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
"1. A writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing th impugned dated 02.01.2025 passed by Sub-Divisional Officer Rajatalab, Pargana - Kasawar Raja, Tehsil - Rajatalab District- Varanasi in Case No. 12870 of 2024 Computer No. T202414700312870 (State of U. P. vs. Baldev and others) under Section 31/32 of U. P. Revenue Code, 2006.
2. A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding direct the respondents to not dispossess from the land in dispute as well as also not demolished the houses related to the petitioner standing over the disputed land in question."
3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the proceedings under Section 31/32 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is not maintainable in view of provision of Section 32(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
4. A preliminary objection has been raised by learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha as well as learned Standing Counsel that against the order impugned, the petitioners have alternative remedy of filing a revision.
5. In view of above, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file revision against the order impugned taking objection as to the maintainability of proceedings as alleged by them.
7. In case, such a revision is filed within one week from today, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months thereafter after ensuring service upon all the opposite parties, giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided there is no other legal impediment. Order Date :- 28.2.2025 Nitika Sri. (Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad