Single Judge dismissed a writ petition challenging a revision order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The court held the petition was barred by 3471 days and no satisfactory explanation for the delay was provided.
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. - 19
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2630 of 2019
Petitioner :- Indravasini And 4 Others Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard Sri Virendra Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned Standing Counsel accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3.
The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition with the prayer to quash the order dated 29.12.2009 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation (Administration), Azamgarh in Revision No. 1336/702 dated 01.07.2009, copy of which is appended as Annexure 5 to the writ petition.
According to the report of the stamp reporter the revision is barred by 3471 days. A specific query has been raised by the Court to the counsel for the petitioners regarding the delay in filing the present writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner paced reliance upon paragraph 11 of the writ petition which is reproduced below:-
" That dispute with regard to allotment of chaks was being contested and pair vied by late Akbal Narain who died in year 2017 and petitioners could not have any knowledge of proceedings of case thus they could not approach before this Hon'ble Court and Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to exempt the writ petition from latches and entertain the same. "
In view of the facts as narrated above, the writ petition filed by the petitioners which is barred about more than 10 years and since no satisfactory explanation has been given in the writ petition, no relief can be granted to the petitioners. The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 18.11.2019 Swati
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition filed over 10 years after the impugned order without satisfactory explanation for the delay can be entertained.
Indravasini And 4 Others
Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 3 Others
Prakash Padia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
