Allahabad High Court

GULAM HUSAINversusCOMMISSIONER AND 5 OTHERS

Decided: 18 March 2026
Bench: PRAKASH PADIA

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed as the petitioner lacks locus standi and has not demonstrated any prejudice.

Summary

The Gram Sabha initiated proceedings against Qayyum Ahmad, which were later dropped by the Assistant Collector on 17‑08‑2021. Gulam Husain, who was not a party to those proceedings, appealed the order under Section 65(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, but the appeal was dismissed by the Additional District Magistrate on 31‑07‑2025. He then filed a revision under Section 210 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was rejected on 13‑01‑2026, leading him to file the present writ petition. The Court observed that the petition contained no allegation of prejudice and that the petitioner was merely a complainant, not a party to the original proceedings. Consequently, the Court held that the appeal and revision did not merit interference and dismissed the writ petition. The dismissal was based on lack of locus standi and absence of any demonstrable injury to the petitioner.

Issues considered

Whether a person who is not a party to the original proceedings has locus standi to challenge the dropping of those proceedings through a writ petition.
Whether the petitioner has shown any prejudice or injury warranting interference with the appellate and revision orders.

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 210
U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 65(5)

Subjects

writ petition
locus standi
U.P. Revenue Code
appeal
revision
administrative law
Uttar Pradesh

Judgment

                                                  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                            WRIT - C No. - 6823 of 2026

                                    Gulam Husain
                                                                                                .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                       Versus

                                    Commissioner And 5 Others
                                                                                              .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)        : Shashank Kumar, Tej Prakash Yadav
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)        : C.S.C., Pradeep Singh

                                    Court No. - 6
                                                         HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

                                    1. The proceedings initiated by the Gram Sabha against the respondent
                                    no.6-Qayyum Ahmad was dropped by the respondent no.3-Assistant
                                    Collector, Ist Class/Tehsildar, Tehsil-Robertsganj, District Mirzapur vide
                                    order dated 17.08.2021. Aggrieved against the aforesaid petitioner who
                                    was not a party in the aforesaid proceedings has preferred an appeal under
                                    Section 65 (5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which was dismissed by
                                    the respondent no.2-Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Sonbhadra
                                    vide order dated 31.07.2025. Aggrieved against the aforesaid revision
                                    under Section 210 of the Code, 2006 was filed by the petitioner before the
                                    respondent no.1, which was rejected by him vide order dated 13.01.2026
                                    hence present writ petition.

                                    2. Nothing has been stated in the entire writ petition nor any arguements
                                    has been raised regarding the prejudice caused to the petitioner by the
                                    aforesaid order.

                                    3. Apart from the same, it is clear from perusal of the record that
                                    petitioner is only complainant. The appeal and revision filed by the
                                    petitioner against the order by which the proceedings initiated against the
                                    respondent no.6 was dropped does not call for any interference.

                                    4. With the aforesaid observations, present writ petition is dismissed.



                                                                                            (Prakash Padia,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    Pramod Tripathi




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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…