MOHD. HASNAIN Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Mohd. Mansoor, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Hemant Kumar Pandey, the learned Standing Counsel for the State of U.P., Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for opposite party No. 6-Gram Sabha Saraydamu.

(2.) By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged validity of a judgment and order dtd. 18/9/2024 passed by the Assistant Collector First Class/ Tehsildar Sadar, District Raebareli in Case No. RST/6410/2023, under Sec. 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

(3.) The learned counsel for the opposite parties raised a preliminary objection that the order has been passed under Sec. 67(3) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and Sec. 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 provides that any person aggrieved by an order of the Assistant Collector under sub-sec. (3) or sub-sec. (4), may within thirty days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Collector.