Allahabad High Court
DHANRAJI DEVI AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- PRAKASH PADIA
Holding
The Court held that the proper remedy is a recall or modification application in the earlier writ case, not a fresh writ petition.
Summary
The petitioners, Dhanraji Devi and others, filed Writ C No. 7771 of 2026 challenging an order obtained by private respondent Jeet Narayan Singh, alleging concealment of facts in a prior judgment dated 10.07.2025 (Writ C No. 20929 of 2025). The order was being used by revenue authorities to initiate proceedings under Section 24 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 against the petitioners concerning various plots. The petitioners sought a stay of these proceedings, while the respondents argued that the order was valid. The Court examined the record and held that the appropriate remedy was not a fresh writ petition but a recall or modification application in the earlier writ case (Writ C No. 20929 of 2025). Consequently, the Court dismissed the present writ petition, granting the petitioners liberty to file the appropriate application in the earlier proceeding.
Issues considered
- The petitioners alleged that the order obtained by Jeet Narayan Singh was procured by concealment of material facts.
- Whether the petitioners can obtain relief through a fresh writ petition or must seek a recall/modification in the earlier writ case.
- Whether the revenue proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 can be stayed pending a recall application.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code — s. 24
Subjects
- writ petition
- recall application
- modification application
- procedural remedy
- U.P. Revenue Code
- Section 24
- court discretion
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 7771 of 2026
Dhanraji Devi And 4 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Tiwari, Vrindavan
Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pradeep Singh
Court No. - 6
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
1. It is argued that private respondent/ Respondent No.4
namely Jeet Narayan Singh obtained an order by concealment
of fact by this Court vide judgment and order dated 10.07.025
passed in Writ C No.20929 of 2025 (Jeet Narayan Singh vs.
State of U.P. and 2 Others).
2. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the revenue authorities are
going a head with the proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P.
Revenue Code, 2006 on the application submitted by the
Respondent No.4 in respect of different plots.
3. Hence, a prayer has been made by Shri R.C. Singh, learned
Senior Counsel to stay the further proceedings pending before
the Respondent No.3.
4. Heard counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel
appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 and Shri
Pradeep Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
Respondent No.4 and perused the record.
5. After going through the record, the Court is of the opinion
that in place of filing of the present writ petition, the proper
remedy is available to the petitioners to move a recall/
modification application in Writ C No.20929 of 2025 (Jeet
Narayan Singh vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others).
WRIC No. 7771 of 2026
2
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to
move a recall/ modification application in Writ C No.20929 of
2025.
(Prakash Padia,J.)
March 18, 2026
Swati
Digitally signed by :-
SWATI PATHAK
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…