Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

DAYARAM YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The writ petition is disposed of, with the Court directing the lower court to decide the pending restoration application within three months and maintain status quo.

Summary

Dayaram Yadav filed a writ petition challenging the Lekhpal's demarcation reports (RC Form‑19 dated 08‑01‑2025 and RC Form‑20 dated 03‑07‑2025) and a dispossession order dated 17‑07‑2025, seeking certiorari and mandamus to prevent interference with his possession. The petitioner also raised that a restoration application under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, filed on 1‑Apr‑2026, was pending, and a notice for implementation of the Section‑67 order was issued on 5‑Apr‑2026. The Court observed that, while the restoration application is pending, the writ petition serves no useful purpose and therefore ordered its disposal. The Court directed the lower court to decide the restoration application expeditiously, preferably within three months of receiving a certified copy of this order, and to maintain the status quo pending that decision. The Court further warned that any undue adjournments by the petitioner would result in automatic vacating of the interim protection granted.

Issues considered

  • Whether the demarcation reports and dispossession order can be quashed by certiorari while a restoration application under Section 67 is pending
  • Whether mandamus can be issued to restrain interference with the petitioner's possession pending the restoration application

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • demarcation report
  • dispossession order
  • restoration application
  • Section 67
  • certiorari
  • mandamus
  • status quo
  • Uttar Pradesh revenue law

Judgment

              HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                            WRIT - C No. - 17560 of 2026

Dayaram Yadav
                                                                       .....Petitioner(s)
                                       Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
                                                                     .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                       :    Subhash Chandra Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s)                       :    C.S.C., Pradeep Singh

Court No. - 36
                    HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking following relief :-

      "(A). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing
      the impugned demarcation report of Lekhpal in RC Form-19 dated
      08.01.2025 and RC Form-20 dated 03.07.2025, as well as in pursuance of
      that passing the impugned dispossession order dated 17.07.2025 passed
      by respondent No. 4 against the petitioner.


      (B). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
      commanding respondent concerned and directing the not to create any
      Interference in peaceful possession/occupation of the petitioner, over the
      land in question."

3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that against an order
passed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, restoration
application filed by the petitioner on 1.4.2026 is pending. During pendency of
the restoration application, notice has been issued on 5.4.2026 for
implementation of the order passed under Section 67.

4. Since the above-mentioned restoration application is pending, no useful
purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending.

5. In view of the above, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to
the Court below to decide the above-mentioned restoration application, in
accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within three months from the
date of production of a certified copy of this order, after ensuring service of
notice upon all the respondents and providing opportunity of hearing to all the
concerned parties provided there is no other legal impediment.
                                                                                              WRIC No. 17560 of 2026
                                                                       2

                                    6. Till disposal of the above-mentioned restoration application, parties are
                                    directed to maintain status quo.

                                    7. It is further provided that petitioner shall co-operate in disposal of the
                                    aforesaid application and will not seek any undue adjournments to linger on
                                    the proceedings and in case any effort is being made by the petitioner, the
                                    interim protection granted by this Court shall automatically be vacated.




                                    May 5, 2026
                                    Rishabh
                                                                                          (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
RISHABH KUMAR
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.