Allahabad High Court
WRIB/1203/2025 of VISHWANATH DUBEY Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT., LKO. AND OTHERS on 19 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - B No. - 1203 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submits that petitioner
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
WRIT - B No. - 1203 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 Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submits that petitioner has filed the writ petition making following prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding to the opposite party no. 2 not to proceed the proceeding of Case No. 0037 of 2024, Computerized Case No. 202454025744050037 (Shiv Kumar and others Vs. State of U.p. and others) U/S 109-A(1) U.P. C.H. Act, 1954 mere disposal of the objection dated 02.12.2025 preferred by the petitioner contain as Annexure No. 6 to the writ petition, in the interest of justice.
(ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding to the private opposite party no. 3 to 6 not create any hindrance in peaceful possession of the petitioner, in the interest of justice."
3. It has been submitted that the proceedings should conclude by the orders of the Consolidation Officer, Pratapgarh dated 18.10.2025 against which the petitioner has preferred an application for recall which is pending consideration and also that a recall application has been preferred in Writ B No. 3715 of 1980.
4. Considering the fact that the applications of the petitioner are already Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Vishwanath Dubey .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s)
pending before the respective authorities who have sufficient powers to pass any interim order and therefore for the aforesaid reasons, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the proceedings in its discretionary power under Article 226/227 of Constitution of India.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application for interim relief in the proceedings where application for recall has been filed by the petitioner. December 19, 2025 Ravi/ WRIB No. 1203 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench