Disposed

Nanhe Gupta v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 Nov 2020WPIL/1318/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a direction to decide a recall application regarding the reclassification of land from pasture to abadi land. The court issued a direction for expedited disposal within six months, complying with prescribed procedures.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 2 to decide the recall application within six months while complying with relevant laws and rules.

Nanhe Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1318 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Nanhe Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for following relief no. (i) as substantial relief:

¶7

" (a) Issue, a writ, Order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 2 to decide Recall Application dated 02.08.2016 as filed by Petitioner and other villagers seeking cancellation of Order dated 19.11.1999 by means of the same category of land i.e. Araji No. 404 has been changed from Pasture / Grazig Land to Abadi Land (Annexure 6) to this writ petition. "

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection in case if an appropriate direction is issued for expeditious disposal of the pending application in a time bound period strictly in accordance with law and by fully complying with the procedure prescribed for under the relevant Act and the Rules.

¶9

In view of the above, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the petitioner's aforesaid application as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of copy of this order.

¶10

It is clarified that the procedure prescribed for conducting such proceedings, shall be religiously complied with and priority shall be fixed in the order in which other pending proceedings, if any, have been expedited by this Court in the past.

¶11

The copy of the order available on official website of this Court shall be treated to be genuine one, however, as and when the certified copy of the order is issued, the same shall also be submitted before the competent authority.

¶12

Order Date :- 24.11.2020 Sanjeev

Nanhe Gupta v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nanhe Gupta v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Karan Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Hriday Narayan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sushil Chauhan Vs State of U P and 8 Others

Ajit Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sarita Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ranjan Dwivedi Vs the Collector District- Prayagraj and 4 Others