Allahabad High Court
SAIF AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 10 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The Court directed the respondent to decide the second appeal within six months of the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.
Summary
Petitioner Saif Ahmad filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent, a revenue officer, to decide Second Appeal No. 2356 of 2024 (Rama Shankar et al. v. Ijhaar Ahmad et al.) pending under Section 331 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari and Land Revenue Act. The appeal had been admitted on 23‑03‑2026 and a substantial question of law was framed, but more than six months had elapsed without a final hearing. The petitioner argued that, under Rule 183(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016, the appeal must be decided within six months of filing. The Court examined the delay and the statutory time‑limit and held that the respondent must be directed to dispose of the appeal within six months of receiving a certified copy of the order. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed with the said direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can direct the respondent to decide the second appeal within six months under Rule 183(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016 — s. Rule 183(4)
- Uttar Pradesh Zamindari and Land Revenue Act — s. 331
Subjects
- writ petition
- second appeal
- delay
- direction
- Uttar Pradesh
- Section 331
- Rule 183(4)
- expeditious disposal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - B No. - 4050 of 2026
Saif Ahmad
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 10 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mayank Shekhar Singh, Suresh Bahadur
Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pradeep Singh
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for
the respondent nos. 1 & 2. Sri Pradeep Singh has accepted notice on behalf
of respondent no. 11.
2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to
the respondent no. 2 to decide the Second Appeal No. 2356 of 2024,
Computerized Case No. AL20241667002356 (Rama Shankar and others Vs.
Ijhaar Ahmad and others) ,under Section 331 of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act,
pending before it since 5.6.2024.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid
second appeal was admitted by the order of the respondent no. 2 dated
23.3.2026 and substantial question of law has been framed. It is contended
that about six months have elapsed, but the final hearing of the second
appeal is being adjourned for no justifiable reasons. It is further contended
that all the contesting respondents have already put in appearance in the
second appeal, therefore, there is no impediment in deciding the appeal
finally. It is submitted that in view of the provisions of Rule 183(4) of the
U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, the second appeal was liable to be decided
within six months from the date of its filing. Submission is that this Hon'ble
Court may fix time frame directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the second
appeal, expeditiously.
4. In view of the aforesaid facts, this writ petition is disposed of with the
direction to the respondent no. 2 to decide the aforementioned second
WRIB No. 4050 of 2026
2
appeal, in accordance with law, within a period of six months, from the date
of presentation of a certified copy of this order.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
September 14, 2026
Ranjeet Sahu
Digitally signed by :-
RANJEET SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…