Allahabad High Court
A227/7403/2025 of PANCHAM Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF REVENUE, LKO. AND OTHERS on 19 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7403 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel for the State respondents no.1 and 2 and Shri Mohan Singh, learned cousnel for respondent no.3. 2. In view of
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7403 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 learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel for the State respondents no.1 and 2 and Shri Mohan Singh, learned cousnel for respondent no.3.
2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, notice to private respondents no. 4 to 15, is dispensed with.
2. Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been filed with following prayer:- "Issue order or direction to commanding and directing tot he opposite party no.2 to decide the stay application dated 22.05.2025 which is pending in appeal No. 1278/2025, under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 Pancham and others Vs. Amrawati and others pending before him, expeditiously within prescribed period as fixed by the Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice.
3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been admitted but no interim order has been passed on the application for interim relief while on the other hand interference is being caused by the respondents on the disputed property for which there is requirement for expeditious disposal of the interim relief application. He further submits that the respondents have been served.
4. Learned State counsel does not oppose the aforesaid prayer.
5. Accordingly, considering the aforesaid submissions the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decided the application for interim relief with expedition, say within next six weeks. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar Singh, Gargi Prakash Misra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohan Singh Pancham .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue, Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s)
6. In case, it is not possible to decide the same within the time prescribed above, he shall decide the same within two weeks thereafter.
7. It is further provided that in case it is not possible to decide the application for interim relief the respondent No.2 shall consider passing ad interim injunction if a case is so made out. December 19, 2025 Muk A227 No. 7403 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench