Allahabad High Court

DESHRAJversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 13 September 2026
Bench: CHANDRA KUMAR RAI

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 along with an application for condonation of delay.

Summary

The petitioner Deshraj filed a writ petition seeking certiorari and mandamus to quash an eviction and damages order dated 04-03-2025 passed by the Tehsildar of Ghatampur under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, claiming long‑standing possession of the land. The petition was filed after a delay of 418 days, which the respondents argued barred the writ. The respondents contended that the Tehsildar's order is appealable under Section 67(5) of the same code and that the delay precludes judicial intervention. The Court examined the record and noted that the order is indeed appealable under Section 67(5). Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 67(5) with a condonation of delay application. The appellate court is to consider the appeal and the condonation after hearing both parties.

Issues considered

Whether the writ petition is maintainable despite a delay of 418 days in filing.
Whether the order of eviction and damages passed by the Tehsildar is appealable under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

Legislation cited

U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67, 67(5)

Subjects

writ petition
certiorari
mandamus
eviction
delay
condonation
appeal
U.P. Revenue Code
Section 67
Section 67(5)
revenue law

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 30349 of 2026

Deshraj
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohammad Faizanul Hasan, Shrawan
Dwivedi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Hari Narayan Singh

Court No. - 37
HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.

1. Office has reported that latches of 418 days in filing the instant
petition.

2. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri
Mohammad Faizanul Hasan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rajesh
Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State
and Sri Hari Narayan Singh, learned counsel for Gaon Sabha.

3. The instant writ petition has been filed for following reliefs;

a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing and
set aside the impugned order dated 04.03.2025 passed by the Tehsildar
Tehsil Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar.

b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding
to do not eject to the petitioner from questioned land.

4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been
passed by Tehsildar under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 for
eviction and damages in illegal and arbitrary manner. He further
submitted that plot in question is recorded as Naveen Parti and petitioner
is in possession of the plot in question since long as such the same shall
deemed to be settled in favour of petitioner. He further submitted that
order of eviction and damages passed by Tehsildar dated 04.03.2025
should be quashed.
WRIC No. 30349 of 2026
2

5. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel
for the State and Mr. Hari Narayan Singh, learned counsel for Gaon
Sabha submitted that impugned order is appealable under Section 67(5) of
U.P. Revenue Code-2006. They further submitted that there is latches of
418 days in filing the petition as such it cannot be entertained.

6. I have considered the argument advanced by counsel for the parties and
perused the record.

7. There is no dispute about the fact that the order for eviction of damages
has been passed by Tehsildar on 04.03.2025 against the petitioner under
Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code-2006.

8. The order passed by the Tehsildar for eviction and damages is
appealable under Section 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code-2006.

9. The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file an
appeal under Section 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code-2006 along with
application for condonation of delay before the appellate court and the
appellate court shall decide the aforementioned appeal considering the
delay condonation application after giving opportunity of hearing to both
the parties, in accordance with law.

(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)
September 14, 2026
v.k. updh.

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…