Allahabad High Court
SUCHIT KUMAR DIXITversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- SIDDHARTH NANDAN
Holding
The Court did not adjudicate the merits of the writ petition but ordered the stay application to be decided expeditiously and restrained any coercive action pending such decision.
Summary
Petitioner Suchit Kumar Dixit filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking to quash a recovery citation dated 20‑04‑2026 issued by the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate under Rules 158 and 162 of the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006, which was based on an order dated 28‑09‑2021 in State v. Suchit Kumar Dixit under Sections 47‑A/33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The petitioner also submitted a stay application dated 27‑09‑2023, which remains pending. The State respondents argued that the appeal arising from the original case has not been decided and no interim protection has been granted, but they raised no objection to the stay application being decided promptly. The Court, without deciding the merits of the writ, directed the Additional Commissioner (Stamp), Prayagraj Region, to decide the stay application within two months and ordered that no coercive steps be taken pending that decision. The writ petition was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of the recovery citation should be entertained pending the pending stay application.
- Whether any coercive steps may be taken under the order dated 28‑09‑2021 before the stay application is decided.
Legislation cited
- Indian Stamp Act, 1899 — s. Section 33, Section 47-A
- U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 — s. Rule 158, Rule 162
Subjects
- writ petition
- stay application
- recovery citation
- U.P. Land Revenue Code
- Indian Stamp Act
- interim relief
- natural justice
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 18929 of 2026
Suchit Kumar Dixit
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jitendra Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 38
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Heard Shri Pramod Kumar Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Shri
Jitendra Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the
Recovery Citation dated 20.04.2026 passed by the Sub-Divisional
Magistrate, Khaga, District- Fatehpur under Rule 158 and 162 of the U.P.
Land Revenue Code, 2006; in pursuance of an order dated 28.09.2021 in
Case No. 0090 of 2020 (State Vs. Suchit Kumar Dixit) under Section 47-
A/33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has already filed a
stay application which is pending consideration. The stay application has
also been appended at Pg-97 along with questionnaire.
4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel submits that the appeal has not
yet been decided nor there is any interim protection granted therein;
however, he has no objection in case the aforesaid stay application dated
27.09.2023 is directed to be decided within a reasonable time and till then
no coercive steps shall be taken.
5. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is being disposed off with a
direction to Respondent No.2- Additional Commissioner (Stamp)
Prayagraj Region, Fatehpur, to decide the aforesaid stay application dated
27.09.2023, strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably
within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified
WRIC No. 18929 of 2026
2
copy of this order; and till then, no coercive steps shall be taken in
pursuance of the order dated 28.09.2021 passed in Case No. 0090 of 2020
(State Vs. Suchit Kumar Dixit) under Section 47-A/33 of the Indian
Stamp Act, 1899.
6. It is made clear that Court has not adjudicated the case on merits.
Respondent No.2- Additional Commissioner (Stamp) Prayagraj Region,
Fatehpur, is expected to decide the stay application of the petitioner, strictly
in accordance with law, adhering to the principles of natural justice.
7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is
disposed off.
(Siddharth Nandan,J.)
May 14, 2026
Sumit K.
Digitally signed by :-
SUMIT KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…