Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35920 (ALL)

RAM DARASH v. STATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS

WRIB/1253/2025 · 2025-04-06

Chandra Kumar Rai

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:49346 Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1253 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Darash Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhila Nand Pandey,Arvind Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J. 1. Heard Mr. Akhila Nand Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Hari Mohan Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. The instant petition has been filed for the following reliefs: "i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus direction to the Consolidation Officer Sagri, District- Azamgarh (respondent no.2) to decide the restoration application dated 11.2.2025 Case No.2048, under Section 9A (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (Rajdeo vs. Ram Daras of Village- Dewara Kadeem, Pargana Gopalpur, Tahsil- Sagri, District- Azamgarh within a fixed period by the Hon'ble Court. ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to return the possession to the petitioner." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the restoration application dated 11.2.2025 filed by the petitioner to recall the order dated 22.1.2025 is pending before respondent no.2/ Consolidation Officer, Sagari, District- Azamgarh, as such, appropriate direction be issued for expeditious disposal of pending restoration application dated 11.2.2025. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for the State submitted that the proceeding under Section 9-A (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 was decided on the basis of compromise vide order dated 18.4.1994, as such, the order dated 22.1.2025 has been passed for making necessary amaldaramad of the order dated 18.4.1994. He further submitted that no application has been filed for recalling the order dated 18.4.1994 nor any appeal has been filed against the order dated 18.4.1994, as such, restoration application filed by the petitioner against the order dated 22.1.2025 cannot be entertained. 5. I have considered the argument advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, no case for expeditious disposal of pending restoration application dated 11.2.2025 is made out. 7. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 Rameez Digitally signed by :- RAMEEZ AHMED High Court of Judicature at Allahabad