Allahabad High Court
RAMPA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Holding
The petition is dismissed as infructuous because the proceeding under Section 30(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has already been finally decided.
Summary
Petitioner Rampa Devi filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing certain respondents to decide her application dated 28‑08‑2025, which sought rejection of proceedings under Section 30(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, and to act against other respondents for alleged forgery and false affidavit. The court took on record a supplementary affidavit from a private respondent indicating that the proceeding under Section 30(2) had already been finally decided by the Additional District Magistrate on 17‑11‑2025. On this basis, the court held that the subject matter of the petition was already resolved and therefore the petition could not be entertained. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. The order was pronounced by Justice Chandra Kumar Rai on 21‑09‑2026.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition seeking mandamus is maintainable when the underlying proceeding under Section 30(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has already been finally decided.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 30(2)
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- U.P. Revenue Code 2006
- Section 30(2)
- infructuous
- final decision
- forgery
- false affidavit
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 37865 of 2025
Rampa Devi
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Niraj Tiwari, Rohit Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Harish Kumar Srivastava,
Shivanand Mishra
Court No. - 37
HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of private respondent is taken
on record.
2. The instant petition has been filed for the following relief:-
"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondent specifically the respondent no.2 and 3 to
decide the petitioner's application dated 28.8.2025 (Annexure-9 to the
writ petition) which relates to reject the proceeding under section 30(2)
of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 and may take action against the respondent
no.5 and 6 about their forgery and false affidavit by passing speaking a
reasoned order within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
3. This Court directed the learned Standing Counsel to obtain instruction
in the matter.
4. Learned Counsel for private respondent submitted that proceeding
under Section 30 (2) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been decided
finally by Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue) Jaunpur
vide order dated 17.11.2025, as such, the instant petition has become
infructuous. He further placed the order dated 17.11.2025 which is
annexed as annexure no. SA1 to the supplementary affidavit.
5. Considering the fact that proceeding under Section 30 (2) of U.P.
Revenue Code, 2006 has been finally decided vide order dated
WRIC No. 37865 of 2025
2
17.11.2025, the instant petition cannot be entertained.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the writ
petition is dismissed as infructous.
(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)
September 21, 2026
Vandana Y.
Digitally signed by :-
VANDANA YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…