Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

DIWAS KASANAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The Court held that the Board of Revenue’s order had been complied with as per the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate’s instructions, and therefore dismissed the writ petitions.

Summary

The petitioners Diwas Kasana and Ravindra Shivamani filed writ petitions seeking a direction to implement an order dated 29 January 2026 of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Revenue, issued under Section 80 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. They claimed that the required fee under sub‑section (9) of Section 80 had been deposited via challan and an application was made to the respondent (Revenue Officer) for compliance, but no action was taken. The Court initially adjourned the matter to allow the State’s standing counsel to seek instructions. On 7 September 2026, the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate submitted written instructions confirming that the Board’s order had been complied with and the necessary entries were made in the revenue records. Relying on these instructions, the Court disposed of the petitions without further order.

Issues considered

  • Whether the fee prescribed under sub‑section (9) of Section 80 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was deposited and the Board of Revenue’s order of 29‑Jan‑2026 was complied with.
  • Whether the writ petitioners are entitled to a court‑directed enforcement of the Board’s order.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Revenue law
  • Section 80
  • Fee deposit
  • Writ petition
  • Implementation of revenue order

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                       WRIT - B No. - 3593 of 2026

Diwas Kasana
                                                             .....Petitioner(s)
                                 Versus

State Of U.P. And 5 Others
                                                           .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                                              :
Counsel for Respondent(s)                                              :

Connected with
                      WRIT - B No. - 3664 of 2026

Ravindra Shivamani
                                                             .....Petitioner(s)
                                 Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
                                                           .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                                              :
Counsel for Respondent(s)                                              :

Court No. - 34

(SN.34) (Transfer from Court No. 51)


                 HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.

1. Heard Sri Suresh Kumar Maurya, Advocate holding brief of Sri
Saurabh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rajiv Gupta,
learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Mayank
Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Aditya Bhushan Singhal, learned
counsel for respondent no.6.

2. On 17.08.2026, this Court passed the following order:

     "1. Heard Sri Shrestha Kumar Maurya, Advocate holding brief
     of Sri Saurabh Singh for the petitioner, learned Standing
     Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 5 and Sri Aditya Bhushan
     Singhal for the respondent no. 6.

     2. The present petition has been filed seeking a direction for
                                                                                             WRIB No. 3593 of 2026
                                                                     2

                                           implementation of the order dated 29.1.2026, passed by the
                                           Board of Revenue, U.P. at Prayagraj, arising out of
                                           proceedings under Section 80 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

                                           3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
                                           in compliance of the order of the Board of Revenue, dated
                                           29.1.2026, the requisite fee, as contemplated under sub section
                                           (9) of Section 80 of the Revenue Code, was deposited through
                                           challan in the government treasury and an application was
                                           made before the respondent no. 4 for compliance of the said
                                           order. However, till date no action has been taken.

                                           4. Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is granted two
                                           weeks time to seek instructions in the matter.

                                           5. List again as fresh on 9.9.2026. "

                                    3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the written instructions have been
                                    submitted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate dated 07.09.2026 according
                                    to which the order dated 29.01.2026 has already been complied with and
                                    necessary entries have already been made in the revenue records.

                                    4. In view of the aforesaid instructions, the instant petition is disposed of
                                    and no further order is required to be passed. A copy of instructions, has
                                    been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner.




                                                                                       (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)
                                    September 9, 2026
                                    Shubham Arya




Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM ARYA
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.