Allahabad High Court

VIKESH GARGversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Decided: 13 September 2026
Bench: CHANDRA KUMAR RAI

Holding

The Court held that the eviction order must be kept in abeyance pending the appeal and quashed the Collector’s order that declined to stay it.

Summary

The petitioner, Vikesh Garg, challenged an eviction and damages order dated 30.01.2025 passed by the Tehsildar under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. He had filed an appeal under Section 67(5) of the same Code, which was pending before the Additional District Magistrate. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the Collector’s order that declined to stay the eviction and a mandamus to restrain any interference with his possession of the land. The Court, relying on the precedent set in Ali Sher v. State of U.P. (2007) that stays should be granted when an appeal affects civil rights, directed that the eviction order be kept in abeyance until the appeal is decided and ordered the appeal be disposed of within three months. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with directions to maintain the status quo over the disputed land.

Issues considered

Whether the Collector’s order declining to stay the eviction order should be quashed.
Whether a stay of the eviction order is warranted pending the appeal under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to restrain interference with the petitioner’s possession of the land.

Legislation cited

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

Subjects

stay of execution
appeal pending
U.P. Revenue Code
Section 67
certiorari
mandamus
land possession
civil procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 35177 of 2026

Vikesh Garg
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arvind Srivastava, Shubham Srivastava,
Vijay Bahadur Vishwakarma
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sudhir Bharti

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

1. Heard Mr. Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.
Shailesh Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and
Mr. Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for Gaon Sabha.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief;

1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the
impugned order dated 26.05.2025 and 05.06.2025 passed by the Collector,
District Gorakhpur, so far as it relates to decline passing any order on the
stay application moved by the petitioner in Appeal No. 4074 of 2025, Vikesh
Garg vs. Stater of U.P. and others, under Section 67(5) of U.P. Rervenue
Code, 2006 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition).
2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the
respondents authority from interfering into the peaceful possession of the
petitioner over plot no. 19 admeasuring area 0,462 hectare, , plot No.
24Kha admeasuring area 0.081 hectare situated in Village Chaura, Pargana
Haveli, Tehsil Chauri Chaura, District Gorakhpur and recovering any
amount from the petitioner in pursuance to the order dated 30.01.2025.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order for eviction and
damages has been passed by Tehsildar on 30.01.2025, under Section 67 of
U.P. Revenue Code-2006 against the petitioner in illegal & arbitrary manner
accordingly an appeal under Section 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has
been filed on behalf of petitioner before respondent No. 2 Collector/ District
Magistrate, Gorakhpur, which has been entertained and transferred before
respondent no. 3. He further submitted that appropriate direction be issued to
respondent no. 3 to decide the appeal within stipulated period and till
WRIC No. 35177 of 2026
2

disposal of appeal, the order of eviction and damages passed by Tehsildar
dated 30.01.2025 should be stayed.

4. Mr. Shailesh Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Mr.
Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for Gaon Sabha submitted that no
interference is required in the matter as the appeal filed by the petitioner is
pending before respondent no. 3.

5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the
petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State, learned counsel for Gaon
Sabha and perused the record.

6. There is no dispute about the fact that the order for eviction and damages
has been passed by Tehsildar under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code-2006
against the petitioner and the appeal filed by the petitioner under Section
67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code-2026 is pending before respondent no. 3.

7. This Court in the case reported in 2007 (102) RD 498 Ali Sher vs. State of
U.P. through Collector, Bijnor and others has held that if order under
appeal or revision has serious consequence then operation of the order must
be suspended till pendency of the appeal/revision. Para Nos. 4 & 5 of the
judgment rendered in Ali Sher (Supra) will be relevant which are as under:

"4. It is well settled that once an appeal or revision is entertained by a
higher Court against an order having civil consequences stay normally
should be granted to avoid swinging pendulum unless the Court for the
reasons to be recorded finds that there is no case for grant of stay as
observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mool Chand v. Raza
Buland Sugar Industries.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances, impugned order dated
16.11.2006 is hereby quashed. Writ petition stands allowed. Appellate Court
is directed to disposal of the appeal of petitioner in accordance with law as
expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the
date of production of certified copy of this order before him and till the
disposal of appeal as directed above, parties shall maintain status quo with
regard to nature and possession over the land in dispute."

8. Considering the ratio of law laid down by this Court in Ali Sher (Supra)
as well as the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petition
WRIC No. 35177 of 2026
3

is finally disposed of directing the respondent no. 3/Additional District
Magistrate (Administration), Gorakhpur, to decide the aforementioned
appeal expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the
date of production of a certified copy of this order. It is further directed that
till the disposal of the aforementioned appeal, the effect and operation of the
order dated 30.01.2025 passed by respondent no. 4 Assistant
Collector/Tehsildar, Chauri Chaura, District Gorakhpur, shall be kept in
abeyance.

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

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…