Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SUDAMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The ex‑parte order dated 09‑12‑2025 is set aside and the respondent is directed to decide the appeal within three months.

Summary

Sudama filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking a certiorari to quash an ex‑parte order dated 09‑12‑2025 issued by the Additional Commissioner, Administration‑IVth, Gorakhpur under Section 24(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, and a prohibition restraining interference with his possession of a plot of land. Respondent No.4, Pawan Kumar, filed a modification application to alter the court's earlier judgment of 17‑02‑2026, but the court found no change in circumstances and rejected the application. The court held that the ex‑parte order should be set aside and directed the respondent to decide the pending appeal (Appeal No. 2901/2025) within three months. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, granting relief to the petitioner.

Issues considered

  • Whether the ex‑parte order dated 09‑12‑2025 passed under Section 24(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 can be set aside by a writ of certiorari.
  • Whether a writ of prohibition should be issued to restrain the respondents from interfering with the petitioner’s possession and construction on the disputed land.
  • Whether the modification application filed by the respondent can be entertained in view of the facts and change of circumstances.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • certiorari
  • prohibition
  • ex‑parte order
  • Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
  • land possession
  • modification application
  • High Court

Judgment

           HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                             WRIT - C No. - 3789 of 2026

Sudama
                                                                       .....Petitioner(s)
                                         Versus

State Of U.P. And 5 Others
                                                                    .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)            : Imtiyaj Ali, Izharul Haque
Counsel for Respondent(s)            : Amish Kumar Srivastava, C.S.C.,
                                       Jeetendra Kesharwani, Sudhir Bharti

Court No. - 6

                        HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

Order on Civil Misc. Modification Application No.2 of 2026

1. The aforesaid modification application has been filed by the respondent
no.4 namely Pawan Kumar to modify the judgement and order dated
17.02.2026.
2. In the fact and change of circumstances, no modification is required
hence a prayer has been made that in place of passing any order on
modification application the relief as prayed for by the petitioner should
be granted.
3. In view of the same, modification application is rejected.
Order on Writ Petition
1. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the
following prayers :-
"i) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of certiorari, calling for the records
and quashing the ex parte order dated 09.12.2025 passed by Respondent No.
2/Additional Commissioner, Administration-IVth, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur, in
Appeal No. 2901/2025 (Computerized Case No. C202505000002901), titled Pawan
Kumar v. Sudama and Others, instituted under Section 24(4) of the Uttar Pradesh
Revenue Code, 2006.


ii) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of prohibition, restraining the
Respondents from interfering with the peaceful possession and construction activities
of the Petitioner over his own plot, bearing Gata No. 239, admeasuring 0.210
                                                                                             WRIC No. 3789 of 2026
                                                                      2

                                    hectares, situated in Village Ramnagar, Tappa-Batesara, Pargana Sidhuwa Jovna,
                                    Tehsil Khadda, District Kushinagar."

                                    2. It is argued by Sri Amish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the
                                    respondent no.4 that pursuant to the impugned order passed by this Court
                                    dated February 17, 2026 entire constructions has already been carried out
                                    by the petitioner.
                                    3. It is further argued that ex-parte order dated 09.12.2025 passed by
                                    respondent no.2 be set aside and the respondent no.2 be directed to decide
                                    the entire appeal in question expeditiously.
                                    4. This prayer has not been opposed by counsel for the petitioners.
                                    5. In this view of the matter and als in the interest of justice, the order
                                    dated 09.12.2025 passed by the respondent no.2 is set aside. The
                                    respondent no.2 is directed to decide the entire appeal in question being
                                    Appeal No.2901 of 2025 most expeditiously and preferably within a
                                    period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this
                                    order.
                                    6. With the aforesaid observations, present writ petition is allowed.


                                                                                             (Prakash Padia,J.)
                                    March 23, 2026
                                    Pramod Tripathi




Digitally signed by :-
PRAMOD TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.