Disposed

Babu Prasad and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2019WRIB/2566/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court directed Consolidation Officer to decide pending objection cases under the Consolidation of Holdings Act within six months, providing parties an opportunity and avoiding unnecessary adjournments, without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Consolidation Officer to decide pending cases under Section 9A(2) within six months of certified copy production without unnecessary adjournments.

Babu Prasad and 3 Others Vs State of U.P… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2566 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Babu Prasad And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raja Ram Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned Standing Counsel accepted notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶6

In view of the order proposed to be passed, notices need not go to the respondent Nos.3 and 6.

¶7

The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition with the following prayers:-

¶8

"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to decide the Case No.4/8 + 5/9 + 6/10 + 7/11 of 2019 (New Case No.) and Old Case No.253/490 of 2013 (State of Maniram & Others) under Section 9A (2) C.H. Act in respect of Khata No.76 Gata No.255, 270, 276, 219, 193M Total Area 2.7130 hectare, Mauja Dharchhuwa Tehsil Ghatampur District Kanpur Nagar pending in the Court of respondent No.2 for deciding the objection of respondent No.3 to 6.

¶9

b. issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶10

c. award the cost of the petition to the petitioners."

¶11

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that though the objections were filed by the respondent Nos.3 to 6 under Section 9-A (2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 before respondent No.2/ Consolidation Officer, Ghatampur District Kanpur Nagar way back in the year 2013 but till date no decision has been taken in the Case No.4/8 + 5/9 + 6/10 + 7/11 of 2019 (New Case No.) and Old Case No.253/490 of 2013 (State of Maniram & Others) under Section

¶12

9A (2) of Consolidation of Holdings Act.

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the respondent No.2 is the competent authority to take decision on the objections filed by the respondent Nos.3 to 6 and he has no objection to the prayer made by petitioners.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the parties present. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties present, the present writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the respondent No.2/ Consolidation Officer, Ghatampur District Kanpur Nagar to consider and decide the aforesaid cases in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order but certainly after giving opportunity to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

¶16

Order Date :- 29.11.2019 saqlain

Babu Prasad and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Prasad and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gayn Chandra Yadav Vs the Deputy Director of Consolidation and 3 Others

C/M Gochar Mahavidyalaya, Rampur, Saharanpur Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Madhuri Kendurkar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Girraj Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Vishal Vs Consolidation Officer (First) and 3 Others

Ram Narayan and 3 Others Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 2 Others