GHANSHYAM SINGH AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. CHIEF SECY. REVENUE LKO AND 5 OTHERS
WRIC/10457/2025 · 2025-11-15
S Q H Rizvi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 195491 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 195491 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 10457 of 2025 Court No. - 20 HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J.
1. Heard Sri Niranjan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Suresh Chandra Kushwaha, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State respondent and perused the material available on record.
2. By means of the present petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the District Magistrate, Raebareli (respondent no. 2) to take decision on the application dated 06.06.2025 submitted by the petitioners in respect of the decision dated 23.03.2011 passed in Regular Suit No. 393 of 2006.
3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are the heirs and legal representatives of one Shiv Dulare Singh. He submits that a suit between one Dharmendra Bahadur Singh and Late Shiv Dulare Singh was decided by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 18, Raebareli on 23.03.2011 on the basis of compromise.
4. The petitioners are seeking enforcement and implementation of the aforesaid judgment and order dated 23.03.2011.
5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State respondents has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the present petition on the ground that the decree passed by the Court of Civil Judge cannot be executed by the District Magistrate. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Niranjan Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ghanshyam Singh And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko And 5 Others .....Respondent(s)
6. After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he does not want to press this petition and prayed that the same may be dismissed as withdrawn.
7. The prayer so made by learned counsel for the petitioners is allowed.
8. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
9. However, it is always open to the petitioners to take legal recourse before the competent Court in the manner prescribed under law. November 15, 2025 Arun WRIC No. 10457 of 2025 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench