Hameeda Khatoon @ Hameeda Begam vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 7783 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Hameeda Khatoon @ Hameeda Begam vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue ... on 17 June, 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35733
 
Court No. - 2
 

 
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 568 of 2025
 

 
Petitioner :- Hameeda Khatoon @ Hameeda Begam
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 6 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Pandey
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Raj Bux Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing the State-opposite party Nos.1 to 5.

2. By means of instant petition, the petitioner has challenged validity of judgment and order dated 25.04.2025 passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P. in revision No.1035 of 2020 whereby the revision filed against the remand order dated 31.12.2019 passed by the Additional Commissioner Ist, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj has been dismissed.

3. By means of the remand order dated 31.12.2019, the Additional CommissionerIst, Prayagraj Division, Prayagrajhad remanded the matter to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Patti, Pratapgarh for deciding the restoration applications filed by both the parties, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties.

4. The Board of Revenue has observed that during pendency of the proceedings before the Sub Divisional Magistrate after remand, this Court had issued an order dated 13.09.2021 in Writ Petition No.20215 (MS) of 2021 for expeditious disposal of the matter.

5. In these circumstances, there appears to be no illegality in dismissal of the revision filed against the remand order passed in revision as the petitioner will have an opportunity to present his case before the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned before whom the matter has been remanded.

6. There is no illegality in the impugned order warranting interference of this Court in exercise of its extraordinary discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

7. Keeping in view of the aforesaid discussions, the writ petition is disposed of by observing that the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh shall decide the restoration applications, expeditiously, in accordance with law, in compliance of the remand order dated31.12.2019passed by the Additional CommissionerIst, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj.

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

Order Date :- 17.6.2025

Shubhankar