Allahabad High Court
A227/7473/2025 of RAJ PRATAP SINGH Vs UP ZILADHIKARI, TEHSIL SOHAWAL, AYODHYA AND ANOTHER on 19 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7473 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Yogesh Kumar Awasthi, learned Standing counsel for respondent No. 1 and Sri Mohan Singh for
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7473 of 2025
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, 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 Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Yogesh Kumar Awasthi, learned Standing counsel for respondent No. 1 and Sri Mohan Singh for respondent No.2.
2. In light of the order proposed to be passed notice to the respondent, if any, is dispensed with.
3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is tenure holder of land being Gata No. 124Mi/2, situated in Village - Kandaila, Pargana - Haveli Awadh, Tehsil - Sohawal, District - Ayodhya. A partition suit was filed by Ram Chandar and others under Section 116 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which was decided by means of order dated 12.02.2021. Against order dated 12.02.2021, recall application was filed which was decided by means of order dated 14.03.2024, whereby share of petitioner was separated in the kurra map.
4. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that for compliance of order dated 14.03.2024, several applications have been made by the petitioner, but till date the revenue authorities have not demarcated the land in question. Hence, present writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the revenue authorities to execute the orders dated 12.02.2021 as well as 14.03.2024.
5. Learned Standing counsel, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner has equally efficacious and alternate remedy of executing the orders of revenue court as per Para 460 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual where an order of revenue authority can be executed.
6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to approach the competent authority under Para 460 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual for execution of the orders passed by the Prescribed Authority as well as of the other authorities.
7. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach competent authority by moving appropriate application under Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohan Singh Raj Pratap Singh .....Petitioner(s) Up Ziladhikari, Tehsil Sohawal, Ayodhya And Another .....Respondent(s)
para 460 of Revenue Court Manual to execute the orders of the revenue authorities. In case, such an application is moved within two weeks from today the same shall be disposed of expeditiously.
December 19, 2025 A. Verma A227 No. 7473 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench