RAMESH KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT. LKO. AND 6 OTHERS
SPLA/350/2025 · 2025-10-10
Rajan Roy, Rajeev Bharti
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 197296 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 197296 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 350 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J.
HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J.
1. Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Kshemendra Shukla, Advocate on behalf of respondent No.4 is taken on record. 2. Heard. 3. This is an appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 04.09.2025 passed in Writ C No.8493 of 2025. Before the Writ Court the following reliefs were sought:-
"Wherefore it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to; 1) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 17-7-2025 passed by the opposite party no. 2 as contained in annexure no. 1 of this writ petition. 2) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties to proceed with the partition case no. 64 of 1989, in the interest of justice. 3) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and restraining the opposite parties from proceedings with new partition case no. 5463/ 2025 [Computerized no. T202510580405463] Sri Kant Vs Shashi Kant and others, filed on 22-7-2025. 4) Issue any other order or direction which is deemed just and proper under the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Surya Bhan Singh, Raghaw Ram Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Dilip Kumar Pandey Ramesh Kumar .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s)
5) The cost of the petition may also be allowed."
4. The order dated 17.07.2025 has been passed in proceedings under Section 176 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1950') for partition of a holding. The relief No.2 is for a partition case bearing No.64 of 1989 obviously which was pending under Section 176 of the Act, 1950 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate. The relief No.3 was to restrain the opposite parties from proceeding with a new partition case No.5463 of 2025 filed on
22.07.2025. All the reliefs pertain to statutory proceedings for partition under Section 176 of the Act, 1950 or Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. Both the enactments are State enactments and there is no dispute in this regard.
As already stated the order dated 17.07.2025 was passed under Section 176 of the Act, 1950. Now, there is a clear exclusion of a special appeal against such order passed by the Writ Court, under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. As regards, relief No.2 and 3 liberty as granted by the Writ Court to raise such objections before the court where such proceedings are pending already exists. As regards relief No.1, the appeal is not maintainable. As regards relief No.2 and 3, the Writ Court has rightly granted liberty to the appellant-petitioner to raise such objections in the pending proceedings. We, accordingly, see no reason to interfere in the matter, the appeal is disposed of with liberty to the appellant to raise objections etc., if any, as far as it may be permissible in law. October 10, 2025 -Piyush- SPLA No. 350 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench