Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 190206 (ALL)

MUNNA LAL AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF UP THRU. ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE, LUCKNOW AND OTHERS

WRIC/10601/2025 · 2025-11-04

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 10601 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Shri K.S. Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for State- respondents no. 1 to 5 and Shri Dileep Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no.6. 2. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code has been initiated against the petitioners by the Tehsildar, Tehsil Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow with regard to the land situated at Gata No. 2499, 2500, 2501, 2519, 2550, which is recorded as category '4' land. It is stated that the names of the petitioners were recorded in the revenue records but by means of the order dated 9.8.2016, the names have been deleted and accordingly after the said order there is unauthorized possession of the said land and accordingly orders for eviction and imposition of penalty have been imposed. 3. It has further been stated that against the order dated 30.5.2025, the petitioners have filed an appeal before the Collector, Lucknow bearing Appeal No. 2770/2025, Computerized No. D 202510460002770 that the appeal is pending consideration and it is during the pendency of the appeal that the respondents have issued notice to the petitioners, due to which they are interfering in the farming and agricultural related work, being conducted by the petitioners. 4. Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances, learned counsel for the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : K.S. Rai, Vishwajeet Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Dilip Kumar Pandey Munna Lal And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of Up Thru. Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue, Lucknow And Others .....Respondent(s) petitioners, confines his prayer for a suitable direction to restrain the respondents from interfering in the possession during pendency of the appeal. 5. Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the writ petition but does not dispute the aforesaid facts. 6. Accordingly, considering the appeal under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code is pending before the Collector, Lucknow and therefore, during pendency of the said appeal, the respondents are restrained from interfering in the agricultural related work being conducted by the petitioners with regard to the aforesaid five gata numbers. It is made clear that the order has been passed by this Court only considering the fact that the appeal preferred by the petitioners, is pending and the benefit of the order shall not be available to the petitioners, once the appeal of the petitioners is finally disposed of. 7. In the light of above, the petition is partly allowed. 8. Let appeal be decided within four months. 9. The petitioners are directed to cooperate in the said proceedings. November 4, 2025 Muk WRIC No. 10601 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench