Onkar Nath Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Heard Sri Rajesh Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Kailash Nath Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.4, Sri Sanjay Kumar Ray, learned standing counsel for the state-respondents and Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent- gram sabha.

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that jurisdiction under Section 48(3) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 has been exercised by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in illegal and arbitrary manner. He submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained in view of the ratio of law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court on 19.12.2025 in WRIT–B No.- 757 of 2024, Kaushal Kishore and others vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation /Chief Revenue Officer, Gonda and others.

Learned counsel for respondent no.4, learned standing counsel for the state-respondents and the counsel for the respondent-gram sabha submitted that no interference is required in the matter as the order alleged to be passed in the year 1981, is forged and fictitious, as such, there is no illegality in exercise of jurisdiction by the Deputy Director of Consolidation.

Matter requires consideration.

State and the Gram Sabha shall file their counter affidavits within 6 weeks. Petitioner will file rejoinder affidavit within two weeks 2 WRIB No. 5413 of 2025 thereafter.

List on 8.7.2026, before the appropriate Bench.

Until further orders of this Court, the effect and operation of the order dated 3.12.2025, passed by respondent no.2 in Case No.1199/2025, under Section 48(3) of the U.P. C.H. Act, shall remain stayed. April 6, 2026 C.Prakash (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)