LIYAKAT ALI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. DISTT. MAGISTRATE JUDICIAL AMETHI AND 10 OTHERS
/9887/2025 · 2025-10-13
Prashant Kumar, Shekhar B Saraf
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 200532 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 200532 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9887 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J.
HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned counsel for private respondents and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents.
2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the impugned notice dated 24.09.2025 issued by respondent No.4, the Revenue Inspector/area Lekhpal, area Jamurwa, Tehsil-Tiloi, District-Amethi in pursuance of the order dated 05.11.2024 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Amethi in Case No.173/2013-14 (Computerized No.D201704710001370) under Section 115(cha) of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 " Mohd. Habib s. Liyakat Ali".
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that raising his grievances the petitioner has filed the aforesaid revision before the respondent authority under Section 115(cha) of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, however the same has not yet been decided.
4. Upon due consideration, we are of the view that the respondent No.1 should be directed to pass a reasoned order upon the revision of the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, the respondent No.1/ Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Amethi is directed to pass a reasoned order upon the aforesaid revision of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of eight Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandra Bhanu Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohan Singh Liyakat Ali .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Distt. Magistrate Judicial Amethi And 10 Others .....Respondent(s)
weeks from date after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
7. It has also been observed that no coercive action be taken for a period of eight weeks or prior to passing of the order as directed by this Court, whichever is earlier. October 13, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/- WRIC No. 9887 of 2025 2 (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench