Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SUSHIL KUMAR SHUKLA AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 10 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The writ petition is disposed of, with the Court directing the Board of Revenue to decide the pending revision expeditiously.

Summary

The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging an interim stay order dated 7 December 2023 issued by the Board of Revenue, Lucknow, which maintained the status quo in a land dispute. They sought certiorari to quash the interim order, mandamus to dismiss the pending revision as barred by sub‑judice, and a direction to have their names entered in the revenue records per a 1987 sale deed and a 2023 appellate order. The Court noted that the petitioners delayed approaching the High Court for over two years and could have sought a stay‑vacation application instead. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition but directed the respondent (Board of Revenue) to finally decide the pending revision within six months, after hearing the parties. The order thus disposes of the writ petition while ensuring the substantive matter proceeds in the appropriate forum.

Issues considered

  • Whether the interim stay order of 7 December 2023 can be quashed by certiorari.
  • Whether the revision petition is maintainable or barred by the principle of sub‑judice.
  • Whether the revenue authorities should be directed by mandamus to enter the petitioners' names in the revenue records as per the sale deed and appellate order.

Subjects

  • certiorari
  • mandamus
  • interim stay order
  • revision petition
  • sub‑judice
  • revenue records
  • land dispute
  • high court writ

Judgment

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                               WRIT - B No. - 2207 of 2026

Sushil Kumar Shukla And 2 Others
                                                                   .....Petitioner(s)
                                         Versus

State Of U.P. And 10 Others
                                                                 .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                  :   Akshay Mohiley, Ankit Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)                  :   C.S.C.

Court No. - 55
                         HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

1. Heard Sri Ankit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
Standing Counsel for the respondents State.

2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

"1. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI to quash the
impugned Interim Stay Order dated 07.12.2023 passed by the Learned Member,
Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow (Opposite Party No. 2) in Revision No.
REV/2630/2023 (Computerized No. R20230341002630), Kripa Shankar vs. Sushil
Kumar Shukla (Annexure No. 1 to the Writ Petition).

II. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the
Opposite Party No. 1 and 2 to dismiss the Revision No. REV/2630/2023 as being non-
maintainable and barred by the principle of sub-judice, in light of the pending Civil
Suit (O.S. No. 232 of 2017).

III. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the
Revenue Authorities to maintain the name of the Petitioners in the Revenue Records
(Khatauni) in accordance with the registered sale deed of 1987 and the final appellate
order dated 17.08.2023 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Judicial)."

3. By the present petition, the petitioners are challenging the interim order
dated 7.12.2023 passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow
directing the parties to maintain status quo as on date. The petitioners
instead of getting the revision decided on merits have come before this
Court challenging the interim orders after about 30 months. The
                                                                                            WRIB No. 2207 of 2026
                                                                   2


                                    petitioners had a remedy of moving a stay vacation application for
                                    vacating the aforesaid order instead of approaching this Court after more
                                    than two years.

                                    4. Be that as it may, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction
                                    upon the respondent no.2 to decide the aforesaid revision itself finally, by
                                    passing appropriate order, in accordance with law, after affording
                                    opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, expeditiously, preferably
                                    within a period of six months from the date of presentation of certified
                                    copy of this order.



                                                                                             (Arun Kumar,J.)
                                    May 18, 2026
                                    Anil




Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.