The Allahabad High Court has stayed the operation of the orders passed by the Chairman, Board of Revenue, constituting three-member benches for different categories of land cases, observing prima facie that the challenge to the exercise of power under Section 9 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has substance. The court said, “Matter requires consideration.”
The order was passed by a division bench of Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Garima Prashad on a petition filed by the Bar Association, Board of Revenue, U.P., Prayagraj, against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three others.
Read also: Allahabad HC Grants 85-Year-Old Retired Police Officer Promotion Benefits From 1980
The petition challenged the Chairman’s orders dated July 3 and July 8, 2026, under which different categories of cases, including those involving State land, lease land of the State, custodian enemy property, nazul land and Gaon Sabha land, were directed to be heard by three-member benches.
The petitioners contended that the power to constitute a bench for a particular ‘case’ or ‘class of cases’ is to be exercised in accordance with Rules 10, 12 and 13 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016.
The petitioners argued that Rule 10 provides for members sitting alone as well as division benches and that, except for specified situations, appeals, revisions, reviews and applications are to be heard by a member sitting alone according to the work distribution.
They further contended that treating different categories of cases as a “class of cases” for constituting three-member benches was beyond the discretion available to the Chairman.
The petitioners also submitted that the arrangement would delay disposal of cases. With only five members available at Allahabad, the arrangement would permit only one three-member bench on every Wednesday, while similar matters could be heard by a single member on other working days, resulting in discrimination in the hearing of similar cases.
The State, however, defended the impugned orders, submitting that Section 9 gives the Chairman discretion to constitute benches for a “class of cases” and that the arrangement was operating successfully at Lucknow and other Circuit Benches.
The court, after considering Section 9 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and Rules 10(1)(2), 12 and 13 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, observed that the petitioners’ arguments “prima facie” appeared to have substance.
The Board of Revenue was granted one week to file its counter-affidavit, with the State also permitted to file its response. The matter has been listed for further hearing on August 25, 2026.
Meanwhile, the court ordered that the effect and operation of the Chairman’s orders dated July 3 and July 8, 2026, “shall remain stayed” until further orders.
It directed the Chairman to pass consequential orders within 24 hours to ensure the functioning of benches at Allahabad (Prayagraj), Lucknow and other Circuit Benches of the Board of Revenue.
Case: Bar Association Board Of Revenue Up Prayagraj And Another vs State of U.P. & 3 Ors
Case No: WRIT C No. – 30204 of 2026
Date of Order: 05.08.2026
Status: Pending (Listed on 25.08.2026)
