Allahabad High Court
SHYAMJEETversusDEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION OFFICER AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Holding
The Court directed the Deputy Director of Consolidation to consider and dispose of the restoration application after a proper hearing, within three months, without expressing any opinion on its merits.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Deputy Director of Consolidation Officer, Jaunpur, to decide a restoration application dated 13 January 2023, which was filed after a revision was dismissed on 29 November 2022 without a hearing. The petitioner argued that the dismissal was violative of the right to be heard and that the restoration application should be entertained, including condonation of delay. The State contended that the revision had been decided on merit and that the consolidation courts lacked power to review the order. The High Court held that the restoration application must be considered and disposed of after granting a proper hearing, and ordered the respondent to do so within three months, without expressing any view on the merits of the application. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a restoration application under Section 48(1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holding Act can be entertained after a revision order was passed without a hearing.
- Whether the High Court can issue a mandamus directing the Deputy Director of Consolidation to decide the restoration application within a stipulated period.
- Whether the consolidation courts have jurisdiction to review the merits of the earlier revision order.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Consolidation of Holding Act — s. 48(1)
Subjects
- mandamus
- restoration application
- U.P. Consolidation of Holding Act
- delay condonation
- right to be heard
- writ petition
- consolidation courts
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - B No. - 1626 of 2026
Shyamjeet
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Deputy Director Of Consolidation Officer And 3
Others .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rakesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, C.S.C.
Court No. - 54
HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.
Yogendra Kumar Sonkar, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for
the State and Mr. Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the
respondent- Goan Sabha.
2. The instant petition has been filed for the following relief:
"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the
Deputy Director of Consolidation Officer, District-Jaunpur/respondent NO.1 to
decide the Restoration Application dated 13.1.2023 filed in revision No. 2446/21-22
(Ramjeet and others Vs. Harinath and others) under section 48(1) of U.P.
Consolidation of Holding Act within stipulated period which may be fixed by this
Hon'ble Court."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the revision filed by
the petitioner along with his brother was dismissed vide order dated
29.11.2022 without affording opportunity of hearing to the parties. He
further submitted that restoration application dated 13.1.2023 filed on
behalf of the petitioner-Shyamjeet to recall the order dated 29.11.2022
along with the prayer for condonation of delay is still pending, as such,
appropriate direction be issued for expeditious disposal of pending
restoration application considering the delay condonation matter in
accordance with law.
4. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State submitted that
WRIB No. 1626 of 2026
2
the revision was decided on merit, as such, restoration application cannot
be entertained in the matter. He further submitted that the consolidation
Courts have no power to review his judgement / order passed on merit.
5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the ground
taken in the restoration application is that order dated 29.11.2022 has
been passed without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as
such, restoration application shall be entertained by the consolidation
Courts.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petition
is finally disposed of directing respondent no.1/ Deputy Director of
Consolidation, Jaunpur to consider and dispose of the restoration
application dated 13.1.2023 filed by petitioner considering the delay
condonation matter first after affording proper opportunity of hearing to
the parties, expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from
the date of production of certified copy of this order. It is made clear that
this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the restoration
application.
(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)
May 6, 2026
Rameez
Digitally signed by :-
RAMEEZ AHMED
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…