Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 30744 (ALL)

RAJENDRA DEO AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/7862/2025 · 2025-03-18

Manish Kumar Nigam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39736 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7862 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rajendra Deo And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nagesh Kumar Dwivedi,Sushil Kumar Srivastava,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. The instant writ petition has been filed for following relief: "I- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 4 not to sale out the land in question (Bhumidhari Land) ie. Khata No. 418, Gata No. 2242, 2243, 2245, 643, 691, 2220, 2239, 2255 total 8 admeasuring Area 3.4936 Hect. and Khata No. 1348 Gata No. 2241 Area 0.9650 Hect situated in village Badagaon. II- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 3 to decide the restoration application filed by the petitioners for recalling the order dated 22.06.2022." 4. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that an ex-parte decree has been passed against the petitioners in a suit under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. After coming to know about the ex-parte decree, the petitioners filed a restoration application on 27.12.2023 which is pending consideration. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is a serious apprehension that the property be sold during the pendency of restoration application. It has been further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent no.4 has already put in appearance in the restoration application. 5. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending and a direction be issued to the respondent no.3 to decide the restoration application filed by the petitioners. 6. In view of these facts, the present petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 3, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Pindra, District Varanasi to consider and decide the restoration application filed by the petitioner, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned provided that there is no other legal impediment. 7. Till decision of the restoration application, both the parties are restrained from alienating the property in dispute. Order Date :- 19.3.2025 S. Singh Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad