Vipin Kumar Gaur @ Pappu vs State Of U.P. Thru. Collector, Ambedkar ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 199 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Vipin Kumar Gaur @ Pappu vs State Of U.P. Thru. Collector, Ambedkar ... on 5 February, 2026

Author: Alok Mathur

Bench: Alok Mathur

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC-LKO:9083
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
LUCKNOW 
 
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 494 of 2026   
 
   Vipin Kumar Gaur @ Pappu    
 
  .....Petitioner(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of U.P. Thru. Collector, Ambedkar Nagar And 6 Others    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Petitioner(s)   
 
:   
 
Kamlesh Kumar, Aman Kumar Chaudhary   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
C.S.C., Mohan Singh   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 5
 
   
 
 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.       

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent No.s 1 and 2 while notice on behalf of respondent No.7- Gram Panchayat has been accepted by Sri Mohan Singh.

2. In view of the proposed order, notice to private respondents are hereby dispensed with.

3. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for direction to the respondent No. 2/Up- Ziladhikari, Tehsil Aalapur, District Ambedkar Nagar to decide Appeal No.1168/2024, computerized case No.T- 202404040401168 "Vipin Kumar @ Pappu Vs. Prashant @ Vittoo and others" under Section 35 (2) of U.P.Revenue Code, expeditiously.

4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the said appeal is pending since 2024 and the order-sheet annexed by the petitioner is from 15.4.2024 which indicates that no proceedings could take place due to call for boycott of the local bar association. The facts which are evident from the order-sheet indicates that there is frequent call for boycott by the local bar association which, in fact, is deprecated by this Court considering the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal Vs. Union of India and another reported in 2003 (2) SCC 45 and it is noticed that even the application for mutation are not being considered and decided because of the call for boycott.

5. Such an action of the local bar association may amount to criminal contempt being a direct conflict with the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court leave it open for the petitioner to invoke the said jurisdiction in case they are so legally advised.

6. The present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2/Up- Ziladhikari, Tehsil Aalapur, District Ambedkar Nagar to decide Appeal No.1168/2024, computerized case No.T- 202404040401168 "Vipin Kumar @ Pappu Vs. Prashant @ Vittoo and others" under Section 35 (2) of U.P.Revenue Code, expeditiously, say, within a period of one year from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him in case there is no legal impediment and subject to cooperation of the petitioner.

7. Learned counsel for petitioner undertakes that petitioner shall appear on all the dates fixed before concerned authority irrespective of the call for boycott and in case any person creates impediment in appearance this Court grants him liberty to file an application for criminal contempt.

8. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

9. The petitioner shall serve a copy of this order to the President and Secretary of local bar association for their compliance.

(Alok Mathur,J.)

February 5, 2026

RKM.