Allahabad High Court
WRIC/33982/2026 of RAVINDRA SINGH AND 4 OTHERS Vs STATE OF UP AND 10 OTHERS on 7 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 33982 of 2026 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. By means of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 33982 of 2026
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. By means of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have prayed for the following relief: "issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 8.7.2026 passed in Case NO. 10029 Of 2026 (Computerized No. T202612070310029 (Manoj Kumar Singh vs. Sudhir Kumar Singh), whereby, the petitioners' recall/ restoration application has been rejected (Annexure: 3 to the writ petition)"
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a restoration application has been filed by the petitioner against the decree and order 8.9.2018 wherein an interim order dated 19.05.2026 has been passed in favour of the petitioner staying the effect and operation of the order dated 8.9.2018 as well as 19.06.2019, however subsequently, the restoration application of the petitioner has been rejected by the impugned order without considering the fact and circumstances of the case.
4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has an efficacious remedy of filing an appeal under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and that the present writ petition is not maintainable.
5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the competent authority by way of filing an appeal and in the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mujtaba Shamim Akhtar, Prakash Chandra Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ravindra Singh And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of Up And 10 Others .....Respondent(s)
event petitioner files an appeal along with an application seeking interim relief within a period of four weeks from today, the competent authority shall first consider and decide the application seeking interim relief within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of the appeal and thereafter make all endeavor to decide the appeal expeditiously.
6. Subject to aforesaid, the writ petition is consigned to record. September 8, 2026 Kuldeep WRIC No. 33982 of 2026 2 (Garima Prashad,J.) Digitally signed by :- KULDEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad