Kalawati Devi And 10 Others v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
In view of above, this writ petition stands disposed of at
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Operative part
Heard Sri A.P.Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Vibhu Rai, learned counsel for respondent no. 4 and Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State. By means of present writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 14.09.2019 passed by Joint Magistrate/ Sub Divisional OfÏcer, Tehsil Sadar, Gorakhpur . The main ground for assailing the order is that petitioner has not given any notice and if the order is sustained interest of petitioner shall get prejudiced. Per contra, Sri Vibhu Rai, learned counsel for respondent no 4 and Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submit petitioners have two remedies against the order either to file restoration/recall application of the order which is claimed to be ex parte or to prefer appeal under Section 38(4) of U.P.Revenue Code, 2006 before the Commissioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute the above arguments regarding maintainability of this petition at this stage raised by learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel as well learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, however, he submits that he should be given some opportunity to file restoration /recall application to be considered on merits. In view of above, this writ petition stands disposed of at this stage with direction that in the event petitioner prefers a restoration /recall application for recalling the order dated 14.09.2019, within a period of three weeks from today, the same shall be entertained and be heard and decided on merit, after giving full opportunity of hearing to the authority concerned, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The petitioner shall have also opportunity to move application for interim stay, if so required and in that event the same shall also be considered in accordance with law and be disposed of within two weeks of its presentation. Order Date :- 10.8.2022/Sanjeev RANJAN Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of above, this writ petition stands disposed of at
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 10 Aug 2022. The bench was AJIT KUMAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.