Swaminath Gajadharprasad Mishra v. State of U.P. and 8 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court issued a writ of mandamus directing the Commissioner, Prayagraj Mandal, to dispose of a pending revision under the U.P. Land Revenue Act within three months, noting it had remained undecided for over four years.
What did the court decide?
Direction to respondent-2, Commissioner, Prayagraj Mandal, to decide Revision No.1015 of 2017 under Section 219 of U.P. Land Revenue Act 1991 with all expedition, preferably within three months.
What the court decided
Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19296 of 2021
Petitioner :- Swaminath Gajadharprasad Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
- Heard Mr. Arun Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing counsel representing respondent-1 & 2.
- Perused the record.
- This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for a writ of mandamus commanding respondent-2,Commissioner, Prayagraj Mandal, Prayagraj to decide Revision No.1015 of 2017 (Computer Case No. C201702001015 (Shashikant and another Vs. Swaminath and others) under Section 219 of U.P. Land Revenue Act 1991, within a time period fixed by this Court.
- Present writ petition came up for admission on 16.08.2021 and this Court passed following order:
"Issue notice to the respondent nos. 3 to 9 by RPAD as well as by regular process, returnable within a period of six weeks. Steps to be taken within a period of two weeks.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether mandamus should be issued commanding the Commissioner to decide a pending revision within a fixed time limit due to its delay.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Swaminath Gajadharprasad Mishra
- respondent
State Of U.P.
Coram
Rajeev Misra
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · October
- Registered
- Case no.
- WRIC/19296/2021
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court