M/S THE DELHI FLOUR MILLS COMPANY LIMITEDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                          WRIT - C No. - 17654 of 2026

M/S The Delhi Flour Mills Company Limited
                                                                   .....Petitioner(s)
                                       Versus

State Of U.P. And 4 Others
                                                                .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                         :   Abhijeet Mukherji
Counsel for Respondent(s)                         :   C.S.C.

Court No. - 38
                   HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.

1. Heard Shri Abhijeet Mukherji, Advocate appearing on behalf of
petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:

“I. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the
Respondent Authorities not to take any coercive steps including recovery proceedings,
attachment of bank accounts, attachment of movable or immovable properties, or any
other coercive action against the Petitioner pursuant to the Judgement and Order
dated 11.09.2025 passed by the District Collector, Gautam Budh Nagar which is
under challenge in Appeal no. 022/2025 Computerized case no. ME20252799382, till
the decision of the said Statutory Appeal pending before the Board of Revenue / Chief
Controlling Revenue Authority, Uttar Pradesh in which at present judgement is
reserved;.


II. To issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court made deem fit and
proper in facts and circumstances of the case.”


3. The only point which has been pressed by the learned counsel for the
petitioner is that, during the pendency of the appeal under Section 56(1) of
the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, the respondent-Authorities may be directed not
to take coercive steps. On a pointed query as to whether any stay application
has been moved by the petitioner before the appellate Authority, he has
brought to the notice of the court a letter which has been addressed to the
District Magistrate, requesting him to keep the proceedings in abeyance. He
has further submitted that the judgment has already been reserved in the
aforesaid matter.

4. However, he has submitted that though the judgment is reserved, and
                                                                                           WRIC No. 17654 of 2026
                                                                   2

                                    the appellate Authority is available only on two working days, there is
                                    likelihood of delay in the delivery of judgment, and in the meantime, the
                                    Collector is pressing for the recovery and threatening to seize the bank
                                    account of the petitioner.

                                    5. He further submits that there is every likelihood that petitioner shall
                                    succeed in the appeal, in which the judgment has been reserved. However,
                                    he has limited his prayer to the extent that till the delivery of judgment,
                                    the respondent-Authorities may be directed not to take any coercive steps
                                    in pursuance of the order dated 11.09.2025 passed by the respondent no.3.

                                    6. The learned Standing Counsel has not denied the fact that the appellate
                                    Authority only sits on two working days and since the judgment has been
                                    reserved, the petitioner is not in a position to move a stay application; and
                                    to which the petitioner submits that in such circumstances he was left with
                                    no other option but to approach the respondent no.3.

                                    7. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the respondent
                                    no.3- District Collector, Tehsil Sadar, Collectorate Surajpur, Gautam
                                    Budh Nagar, is requested not to take any coercive steps against the
                                    petitioner, till the delivery of the judgment in Appeal No. 022 of 2025.

                                    8. With the aforesaid observations and direction the writ petition stands
                                    disposed off.




                                                                                        (Siddharth Nandan,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    Sumit K.




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