Disposed

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

Allahabad HC2 Jul 2021WRIC/8755/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition where petitioners sought a direction to decide a 19-year-old pending land revenue case. The court issued an order directing the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to decide the proceedings within six months with expedition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent-3 to decide Case No.22/2001 under Section 33/39 of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act within six months.

Munshi Lal and 21 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 89

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8755 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Munshi Lal And 21 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Salilendu Kumar Upadhyay,Ashish Kumar Ojha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. S.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for petitioners, who is available on audio/video link. Learned Standing Counsel representing respondents-1 to 4 is also available.

¶6

Petitioners have filed present writ petition for a direction to respondent-3, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, District Mainpuri to decide Case No.22/2001 (State Vs. Mushi Lal and others) filed under Section 33/39 of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act within a time bound period.

¶7

Record shows that dispute relates to survey plot no.267, area 4.144 hectares situated in Village- Mauja Araji Line, Shahri, Tehsil Sadar, District Mainpuri.

¶8

Proceedings under the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1972 was initiated against petitioners which came to be decided against petitioners. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by prescribed authority petitioners filed an appeal which came to be allowed vide order 02.02.1995. Subsequently, Nagar Palika filed a review petition bearing Misc. Case No.09 of 1995 seeking review of judgment and order dated 02.02.1995 passed by 4th Additional District Judge, Mainpuri, which also came to be dismissed.

¶9

Subsequently, it appears that State of U.P. initiated proceedings under Sections 33 and 39 of U.P. Land Revenue Act with regard to land in dispute in the year 2001.

¶10

Learned counsel for petitioner contends that inspite of the fact that a period of 19 years has rolled by above-noted proceedings have yet not been decided. He therefore submits that failure to decide above-noted case even after expiry of 19 years cannot be justified in any manner. It is thus urged that interest of justice shall be served in case a direction is issued to respondent-3, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, District Mainpuri to decide above-noted case.

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel does not dispute the facts as notedabove as well as submissions urged by learned counsel for petitioners.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of record, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping the writ petition pending. Interest of justice shall be served in case a direction is issued to respondent-3, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, District Mainpuri to decide Case No.22/2001 (State Vs. Mushi Lal and others) filed under Section 33/39 of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act with all expedition without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties and within a reasonable period.

¶13

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to respondent-3, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, District Mainpuri to decide Case No.22/2001 (State Vs. Mushi Lal and others) under Section 33/39 of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act with all expedition without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified/computer generated copy of this order which shall be filed before him by petitioners by means of a notary affidavit.

¶14

Order Date :- 2.7.2021 Saif

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munshi Lal and 21 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandra Dev Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others

Reena Vs the Deputy Director of Consolidation and 2 Others

Sudhakar Chauhan and 20 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

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

Lalti Devi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others