Writ petition challenging non-adjudication of five revenue cases by Assistant Collector/Tehsildar was dismissed. The court held that the petitioner lacked personal interest in the matter, making the writ petition non-maintainable.
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. - 59
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 29339 of 2021
Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Maya Pati Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rameshwar Prasad Shukla
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. M.P. Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing respondents-1 to 3 and Mr. R.P. Shukla, learned counsel representing respondent-4.
Petitioner has filed present writ petition for a writ of mandamus commanding respondent-3, Assistant Collector/Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District Ballia to decide Case No.385 of 2018 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Puranmasi), Case No.386 of 2018 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Paras Nath), Case No.387 of 2018 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Gopalji), Case No.388 of 2018 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Ramesh Kumar) and Case No.389 of 2018 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Heeramani) under Section 67(1) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within a time bound period.
At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection by submitting that petitioner has no personal interest in the matter and, therefore, he cannot maintain present writ petition. Consequently, mandamus as prayed for cannot be issued by this Court.
When confronted with above, learned counsel for petitioner could not overcome the same.
In view of above, present writ petition fails and is therefore liable to be dismissed.
It is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 12.11.2021 Saif
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioner has personal interest to maintain writ petition commanding Assistant Collector/Tehsildar to decide specific revenue cases under Section 67(1) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006
Sanjay Kumar Verma
State Of U.P.
8 Others
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
