Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 43046 of 2018 Petitioner :- Shyam Narayan Yadav Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Girja Shanker Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
The contention of the petitioner is that after the report was submitted, the procedure as had been prescribed under Rule 22(9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15) and (16) of the U.P.
Revenue Code Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') was not followed.
If that is the grievance of the petitioner, he may approach the Sub-Divisional Officer stating that the procedure as is prescribed under Rule 22 of the Rules had not been followed. If despite his objection, final orders are passed, the petitioner would always have the remedy of filing an Appeal under section 24(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 GS (Siddhartha Varma, J.)