High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a mutation appeal order allowing an appeal filed after delay was condoned and remanding the matter to the authority for fresh hearing, finding no material prejudice to the petitioner.
Writ petition dismissed with no interference required against the appellate order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 2
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8409 of 2018
Petitioner :- Kamal Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sachchidanand Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J.
Heard Sri Sachchidanand Srivastava for the petitioner , Standing Counsel for State and Sri Anand Kumar Srivastava for respondent-3.
The writ petition has been filed against the order of appellate authority dated 23.12.2017 by which mutation appeal has been allowed and matter has been remanded to Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Basti to pass an appropriate order after hearing both the parties.
The argument of the counsel for the petitioner is that there was inordinate delay in filing the appeal inasmuch as the order dated 11.12.2008 was challenged in appeal on 22.6.2017 but without condoning the delay, the appeal has been allowed.
A perusal of the impugned order shows that there was delay condonation application and the Collector was satisfied with the cause of delay inasmuch as the order was exparte order. Thus even if the appeal has been allowed ignoring any specific order for condoning the delay in filing the appeal then also it shall be deemed to have been condoned. Otherwise also in the order of mutation proceeding , writ petition is not maintainable as held by Division Bench of this Court in Smt. Nirmala Devi Vs. State of UP 2011 (8) ADJ 385. By the impugned order, the matter has been remanded, which does not cause any material prejudice to the petitioner. It is open for the petitioner to satisfy the Executive Officer about title and possession of the petitioner over the disputed property.
No interference is required by this Court. The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 6.3.2018 Rahul /-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with an appellate authority's order allowing a mutation appeal filed with condoned delay.
Whether a writ petition lies against an order in mutation proceedings.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Smt. Nirmala Devi Vs. State of UPReferred¶8
Smt. Nirmala Devi Vs. State of UP 2011 (8) ADJ 385
Kamal Ahmad
State Of U.P.
Ram Surat Ram Maurya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
