Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 92348 (ALL)

SMT FEKANI DEVI v. STATE OF U P THROUGH ITS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND 6 OTHERS

WRIC/33450/2025 · 2025-09-22

Prakash Padia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 33450 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. 1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the prayer to quash the order dated 23.06.2025 passed by the Respondent No.2 namely the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Fourth, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur. 2. Facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that the objections were filed by the Respondent Nos.4 to 7 namely Nurulhoda and 3 others before the Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), District- Kushinagar/ Prescribed Authority under Ceiling Act. 3. Objections were rejected by the Respondent No.2 vide order dated 02.05.2025. Aggrieved against the aforesaid, the aforesaid respondents preferred statutory appeal before the Respondent No.2 namely Additional Commissioner (Administration) Fourth, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur as provided under Section 13 of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act & Rules 1960, in which an order of status quo has been passed by him on 23.06.2025. 4. Aggrieved against the aforesaid, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. Though it is argued that private-respondents are trying to interfere in the peaceful possession of the petitioner pursuant to the aforesaid order but no such pleadings whatsoever has been made by the petitioner in the entire writ petition. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Avanish Kumar Upadhyay, Raj Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Smt Fekani Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U P Through Its, Principal Secretary And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. After some arguments counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer and prayed that direct the Respondent No.2 before whom the appeal No.1191 of 2025 is pending to decide the same, expeditiously. 6. Heard counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. 7. In view of the order proposed to be passed today, notices need not be issued to the private-respondents. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and without interfering with the order dated 23.06.2025 passed by the Respondent No.2, the present writ petition is disposed of finally, directing the Respondent No.2, Additional Commissioner (Administration), Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur to decide the aforesaid appeal, expeditiously and without granting unnecessary adjournment. 9. Needless to say that necessary orders will be passed after providing opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned. September 23, 2025 Swati WRIC No. 33450 of 2025 2 (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- SWATI PATHAK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad