Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10057 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dushyant Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjai Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs: "A. A writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the orders dated 30-12-2024 passed by Commissioner, Moradabad Division, District Moradabad in Revision no. 2391 /2024 Computerized case no. C202413000002391 'Dushyant Singh and others V State of Uttar Pradesh' and order dated 23-09-2024 passed by Learned Sub Divisional Officer, District- Rampur in case no. 1561 of 2024, Computerized case no. T 202423590401561 'State of Uttar Pradesh V Dushyant Singh and others'. B. A writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the entire proceedings in pursuant to the application moved on 18- 09-2023 by Additional District Government Counsel (Revenue), District-Rampur, for the proceedings under section 104/105 U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, 'State of U.P. Vs Dushyant Singh and others' case no. 1561/2024 pending before the court of Sub Divisional Officer Bilaspur, Rampur. C. A writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus not to interfere in the peaceful possession of the petitioner no. 1 on the Gata no. 181 area 4.957 Hectare and peaceful possession of the petitioner no. 2 Gata no. 164 area 5.042 Hectare situated in Village Temara, Tehsil, Bilaspur, District -Rampur except in accordance with law." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that an application under Section 104/105 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was filed on behalf of the State Government on 18.09.2023 with the allegations that the petitioners have purchased the land by means of a sale deed dated 09.04.2008 and the total land held by the petitioners is more than the permissible limit and therefore, land purchased by the petitioners beyond the permissible limit be directed to be recorded in the name of the State Government. After receiving the notice, the petitioners filed their written statement as well as an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. specifically stating therein that the petitioners have not purchased any land and the allegations in the application that the petitioners have purchased the land by means of a sale deed dated 09.04.2008 is wholly incorrect. There is no sale deed in existence in favour of the petitioners dated 09.04.2008 as alleged in the application. The land held by the petitioners is ancestral land of the petitioners and therefore, the application may be rejected. By order dated 23.09.2024, the application filed by the petitioners on Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. was rejected. The revision filed by the petitioners has also been rejected by order dated 30.12.2024 passed by the revisional court. It has been further contended that the orders impugned have been passed without recording any finding as to the fact whether any sale deed was executed in favour of the petitioners on 09.04.2008 as alleged in the application. It has also been submitted by counsel for the petitioners that no such sale deed is in existence nor any such sale deed has been filed before the court below. 4. Matter requires consideration. 5. Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 are represented by learned Standing Counsel. 6. Respondents may file counter affidavit within a period of three weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter. 7. List thereafter. 8. Till the next date of listing, further proceedings of Case No. 1561 of 2024 (State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Dushyant Singh and others) pending in the court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil- Bilaspur, District- Rampur shall remain stayed. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 Nitika Sri. (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad