Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 64759 (ALL)

URMILA DEVI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

WRIB/2215/2025 · 2025-05-27

J J Munir

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91844 Court No. - 49 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2215 of 2025 Petitioner :- Urmila Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Phool Singh Yadav,Vaibhav Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- Avinash Chandra Srivastava,C.S.C. Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J. A similar objection regarding maintainability of proceedings under Section 198 (4) of the U.P. Z.A & L.R. Act on ground of limitation etc. had earlier been rejected by the Additional Collector vide order dated 20.12.2018 against which the petitioner filed a revision to the Commissioner, who dismissed it, affirming the order. Now, the petitioner has moved a second application dated 15.10.2024 again raising the point of limitation with a prayer that it should be decided first in point of time before proceeding with the case under Section 198(4) of the U.P. Z.A & L.R. Act. The earlier application raised an identical point and wanted the issue of maintainability decided first before proceeding with the case, also on the ground of limitation. The Additional Collector has rejected the present application holding that a second application is an endeavour to delay the proceedings, which are at the stage of hearing. This order has been upheld by the Board of Revenue vide order dated 08.05.2025. The Board have also reasoned that the earlier application to the same effect had been rejected and upheld by the Commissioner. The Board have, therefore, dismissed the revision. In the opinion of this Court, once this point has been raised and decided against the petitioner, it cannot be raised by making a fresh application. This Court may clarify that the rejection of an application asking the point of limitation to be decided first will not preclude the petitioner from urging at the hearing of the cause that the patta cancellation proceedings are, after all, barred by time. The approval to the orders passed by the Authorities below is only to the fact that the point of limitation need not be decided prior to hearing of the cancellation proceedings. Subject to the above remarks, this petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 28.5.2025 Deepak Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad