Disposed

Ramesh Chandra and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2021WRIB/912/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted a direction to the Board of Revenue, U.P., Allahabad to decide a long-pending revision application concerning land tenancy within six months. The court held that further delay would not serve the interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Board of Revenue, U.P. Allahabad to decide pending revision within six months from certified copy.

Ramesh Chandra and 3 Others Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 7

¶2

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 912 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Ramesh Chandra And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Aman Srivastava,Virendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Manvendra Nath Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Virendra Kumar, learned counsel for petitioners who is available on audio/video link. Learned Standing Counsel representing respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, is also available.

¶6

Writ petitioners Ramesh Chandra, Satish Chandra, Suresh Chandra and Shilesh Chandra have approached this Court for a writ of mandamus commanding respondent No. 4 Board of Revenue U.P. at Allahabad to decide Revision No. 109 of 201112 (Computerized Case No. AL 20120203991220) (Ramesh Chandra and others Vs. State and others), pending before Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad expeditiously preferably within a time period fixed by this Court.

¶7

Perused the record.

¶8

Above mentioned revision has been filed by petitioners challenging orders dated 9.4.2012 and 25.8.2009 in proceedings under Section 265 of U.P. Tenancy |A|ct.

¶9

Learned counsel for petitioners contends that interim order was granted in favour of petitioner on 6.2.2014. However, in spite of the fact that a period of 8 years and 11 months has rolled by from the date of filing of above noted revision, aforesaid revision is still pending. He, therefore, submits that interest of justice shall be served in case a direction is issued to respondent No. 4 Board of Revenue U.P. at Allahabad to decide Revision No. 109 of 2011-12 (Computerized Case No. AL 20120203991220) (Ramesh Chandra and others Vs. State and others), pending before Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad within a time bound period.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned Standing Counsel and upon perusal of record, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping this writ petition pending.

¶11

Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of finally with a

¶12

direction to respondent No. 4 Board of Revenue U.P. at Allahabad to decide Revision No. 109 of 2011-12 (Computerized Case No. AL 20120203991220) (Ramesh Chandra and others Vs. State and others) filed by petitioners, with all expedition without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified/computerized copy of this order before respondent No. 4 which shall be filed by petitioners by means of a notary affidavit.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.7.2021 HSM

Ramesh Chandra and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Chandra and 3 Others 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

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Piroo and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Munshi Lal and 21 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Usha Devi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Tauheed Ahmad Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 4 Others

Anil Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Thunnu Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others