Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14561 (ALL)

AISHA KHANAM AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 11 OTHERS

WRIC/31597/2026 · 2026-10-05

Chandra Kumar Rai

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31597 of 2026 Court No. - 37 HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard Mr. Akhtar Ali, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Shashi Kant Kushwaha, learned standing counsel for the state- respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to consider the application of the petitioners filed by them under Section 32 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and to restore the entry of their name in the revenue records in respect to the land in question, i.e., khasara plot no.1003 (new no.770), area 0-4-0 biswa (600 sq. yard) and khasara plot no.1004 (new no.771) area 0-10-10 (10 biswa 10 biswansi) 1362 sq. yard, situated in village and town Bugrasi, Tehsil Syana, District Bulandshahar. 2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding and restraining the respondent nos.4 to 10 from creating any interference in the peaceful possession of the petitioners and not to raise any construction over the land in question." 3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that application under Section 32 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been filed on behalf of the petitioners but the same has not been considered by the authorities, as such, appropriate direction be issued to Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhtar Ali Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Aisha Khanam And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 11 Others .....Respondent(s) respondent nos. 2 and 3 to consider the aforementioned application of the petitioners. 4. On the other hand, learned standing counsel submitted that the prayer made in the instant petition cannot be allowed as proper application as provided under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, has not been filed by the petitioners. 5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the state and perused the records. 6. Under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, complete procedure has been prescribed for redressal of the grievance of the tenure holder, as such, petitioners should file proper application as prescribed under the Code. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioners to file appropriate application as provided under Section 32 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and Rules framed thereunder, within a period of three weeks from today along with the certified copy of this order, which shall be considered and disposed of by the authorities, in accordance with law. October 6, 2026 C.Prakash WRIC No. 31597 of 2026 2 (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad