Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15694 (ALL)

RAMESH @RAKESH AND 3 OTHERS v. DEVNARAYAN AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/32088/2026 · 2026-10-07

Chandra Kumar Rai

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 32088 of 2026 Court No. - 37 HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard Mr. Mohd. Shahanshah Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Krishna Kumar Chaurasia, learned counsel for the private respondents, Sri Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the state-respondents and Sri Pradeep Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-gaon sabha. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:- "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent No.3/Sub-Divisional Officer, Lalganj, District-Mirzapur to decide the Case No.5660 of 2025 (Computerized Case No.T202516530205660)U/S 209 (h) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 Inre Ramesh @ Rakesh and Others. vs. Devnarayan and Others pending before him within specific period. " 3. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that against the ex parte order passed in the proceeding under Section 229-B of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, a time-barred restoration application filed on behalf of the petitioners is pending before respondent no.3 since 18.9.2025. He further placed the copy of the order-sheet of the pending proceeding in order to demonstrate that matter is not proceeding expeditiously. 4. On the otherhand learned counsel for private respondents submitted that there is inordinate delay in filing the restoration application as such no interference is required in this matter. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Badal Khan, Mohd. Shahanshah Khan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Krishna Kumar Chaurasia, Pradeep Singh Ramesh @Rakesh And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) Devnarayan And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. There is no dispute about the fact that the restoration application dated 18.9.2025 filed on behalf of the petitioner to recall the order dated 15.9.2000, passed in the proceeding under Section 229-B of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act is time barred and the same is pending before respondent no.2. 7. No case for expeditious disposal of the time-barred restoration application is made out. 8. The writ petition is dismissed. October 8, 2026 C.Prakash WRIC No. 32088 of 2026 2 (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad