Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 47529 (ALL)

DHIRENDRA KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIB/1535/2025 · 2025-07-30

S Q H Rizvi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1535 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dhirendra Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kunwar Mayank Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Azad Rai,C.S.C. Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J. 1. Heard Sri Kunwar Mayank Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ashutosh Kumar Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing the State-respondent and perused the record. 2. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the following relief: "A. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the notice under Rule 26(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holding Rules, 1964 dated 04.03.2025 issued by the respondent no. 4 (Consolidation Officer, Tehsil Khaga, District Fatehpur) to the petitioner (Vide Annexure No. 8 to the writ petition) B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 to decide the petitioner's application dated 11.03.2025 and 19.03.2025 (Vide Annexure No. 9 and 10 to the Writ Petition) within stipulated period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court." 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that an agricultural 'patta' in favour of the father of the petitioner was granted and pursuant to the aforesaid 'patta' the father of the petitioner consturcted a house over the plot in question. 4. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that since the time of his father the petitioner and his family is in actual physical possession of the aforesaid house. He further submits that a notice dated 04.03.2025 was issued to the petitioner under Section 9A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 and the petitioner in response to the said notice submitted his objection on 19.03.2025. Further, on 11.03.2025, the petitioner appeared in-person before the respondent no. 2 and requested for the withdrawal of the aforesaid notice dated 04.03.225. It is also submitted on behalf of the petitioner that on 19.03.2025 an application was moved requesting therein for an enquiry to be made in the matter before passing any order. 5. It has been very categorically submitted by the learned counsel that the revenue officials are continuously threatening the petitioner to remove the existing construction from the plot in dispute. 6. Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the State has raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the present writ petition being against the 'notice'. He submits that even otherwise the petitioner vide the impugned notice has been simply required to give his reply, before the court concerned i.e. the court of Consolidation Officer, Tehsil Khaga, District Fatehpur. 7. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts that the petitioner has already submitted a reply / objection in response to the impugned notice which is pending for consideration before the concerned authority, this Court, without adverting on merits of the case and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties present before the Court, deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to Consolidation Officer, Tehsil-Khaga, District Fatehpur (respondent no.4), to thoroughly consider the objection / reply filed by the petitioner in response to the impugned notice and conclude the proceeding in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible say within a maximum period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 8. It is further provided that in case if the petitioner prefers an application for interim protection before the respondent no. 4 in the aforesaid proceeding under Section 9A(2) of the C.H. Act within a period of fifteen days from today, the same shall also be considered and appropriate order shal be passed strictly, in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of its filing, unless there is any legal impediment. It is further directed that no unnecessary adjournments be granted to the parties and the adjournment, if prayed for, will be permissible to be granted only in exceptional circumstances. 9. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Arif Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad