Allahabad High Court
KAILASH BABUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 20 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The court directed respondent No.2 to decide the stay application and Revision No.4815 of 2025 positively on the next date fixed, emphasizing expeditious disposal.
Summary
Petitioner Kailash Babu filed a writ petition seeking a direction to respondent No.2 to decide a stay application filed on 29 September 2025 in Revision No.4815 of 2025. The revision, accompanied by the stay, has remained pending for over six months without any hearing, and the respondent has not set an earlier date despite the court’s earlier order for expeditious disposal within three months. The petitioner argued that the delay violates Rule 183(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016 and risks breach of peace over his Bhumidhari land. The court examined the procedural lapse and the statutory requirement for timely disposal. It directed respondent No.2 to decide the stay application and the revision positively on the next date fixed, and to expedite the matter given the undue delay. The petition was disposed with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether respondent No.2 should be directed to decide the stay application and revision within a fixed, expeditious timeframe
- Whether the delay in hearing violates Rule 183(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016
- Whether the court can issue a mandatory direction for immediate disposal of pending revision and stay application
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016 — s. Rule 183(4)
Subjects
- writ petition
- stay application
- revision
- expeditious disposal
- U.P. Revenue Code Rules
- breach of peace
- Bhumidhari land
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - B No. - 1990 of 2026
Kailash Babu
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 20 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manish Kumar Pathak, Sunil Kumar
Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Avinash Chandra Srivastava, C.S.C.
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard Sri Manish Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Sri Avinash
Chandra Srivastava for the respondent no.5.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for a direction upon respondent
no.2 to decide the stay application dated 29.9.2025 filed in Revision
No.4815 of 2025, expeditiously, within a time frame as fixed by this
Court.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the revision
filed by him before respondent no.2 is pending since September, 2025.
The aforesaid revision was accompanied by stay application. However,
the aforesaid stay application has not been considered by the respondent
no.2, till date. At the stage of admission of the revision, notices were
issued to the contesting respondents, who have not put in appearance, till
date. As the application for demarcation of his Bhumidhari land has been
rejected, there is possibility of breach of peace on the spot.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that during the
pendency of the appeal before the Additional Commissioner
(Administration), Agra Division, Agra, this Court by its order dated
24.2.2025 directed for expeditious disposal of the aforesaid appeal within
a period of three months and the parties were directed to maintain status
quo till the disposal of the appeal. He has further contended that on
25.3.2026 when the case could not be taken up due to paucity of time, the
WRIB No. 1990 of 2026
2
respondent no.2 fixed 8.7.2026 as the next date in the matter, which was
wholly unjustified, as no reasons have been recorded in the said order for
such a far date, which is in contravention of Rule 183(4) of the U.P.
Revenue Code Rules, 2016.
5. In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition stands disposed of with a
direction upon the respondent no.2 to decide the stay application filed by
the petitioner alongwith the revision No.4815 of 2025, positively on the
next date fixed. He is further directed that as more than six months have
been passed since the filing of the revision, all endeavours shall also be
made to decide the aforesaid revision, expeditiously.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
May 5, 2026
Anil
Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…