Disposed

Rudra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and 13 Others

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2018WRIC/15139/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed seeking direction to Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bara, to expedite hearing of a pending restoration application under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. Court disposed of petition on consent directing expedited conclusion within four months.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of on consent; direction to SDM to conclude hearing within four months.

Rudra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 13 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15139 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Rudra Pratap Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 13 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Abhishek Shukla, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

Notice need not be issued to the private respondents in view of the order proposed to be passed.

¶7

The petitioner is before this Court with the request to command the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Bara, District Allahabad to decide the restoration application filed by the fourth to fourteenth respondent dated 31.07.2017 in Case No.T2016020307166 of (Rudra Pratap Singh and others vs. Tulsi Ram and others) under section 24 of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, expeditiously.

¶8

Learned counself or the petitioner submits that the proceeding under Section 24 of the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 has been finalized in favour of the petitioner on 28.02.2017 but reason best known to the private respondents, they have proceeded to file aforesaid review/restoration application and on account of pendency of the same, petitioner is suffering irreparable loss and injury.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel very fairly states that in case the aforesaid case is still pending, the same shall be considered and decided by the Authority concerned expeditiously.

¶10

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, on consent, the writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Bara, District Allahabad to expedite the hearing of the aforesaid case and conclude the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him, without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, except upon payment of cost but certainly after according opportunity of hearing to all the stake holders in the matter.

¶11

Order Date :- 26.4.2018 A. Pandey

Rudra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and 13 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rudra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and 13 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

jugal kishor alias ravi Vs State of U.P. and 3 others

rampal singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 others

Anil Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rama Shanker (Died) and Another Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Ghirau Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Jai Prakash Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others