Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21257 (ALL)

BHAGWAN SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIB/676/2025 · 2025-04-24

Chandra Kumar Rai

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:64661 Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 676 of 2025 Petitioner :- Bhagwan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd Adil Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J. 1. Heard Sri Mohd Adil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashish Kumar Yadav, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The instant petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities specially Respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the respresentation of the petitioner dated 30.12.2024 within stipulated period. II. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent nos. 2 and 3 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 30.12.2024 within stipulated period. III. Any other suitable writ order or direction in nature which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. IV. Award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner throughout." 3. In compliance of the earlier of this Court dated 27.02.2025, instruction dated 05.03.2025 sent by District Magistrate, Sambhal/Additional District Magistrate, Sambhal is already on record. 4. Sri Ashish Kumar Yadav, learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instruction submitted that the prayer made in the instant petition cannot be granted in view of the provisions contained under Section 30 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has already filed a representation before the Consolidation Officer/District Magistrate as well as Additional District Magistrate for correction of the map of the plot in question, as such the authorities be directed to take appropriate decision in the matter. 6. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. There is no dispute about the facts that village has been de- notified under Section 52 of the U.P.C.H. Act. 8. The prayer made in the instant petition cannot be granted by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India unless proper proceeding is initiated in accordance with law. 9. The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to initiate proper proceedings as provided under the law. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 Neetu Digitally signed by :- NEETU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- NEETU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad