Disposed

Smt. Sehrul Nisa v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko and Others

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2022/310/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Matter under Article 227 regarding a writ petition seeking a direction to the Sub Divisional Magistrate to dispose of a pending land revenue case expeditiously within nine months due to unnecessary delays by plaintiffs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Sub Divisional Magistrate to decide the pending case (T-2019040401222) expeditiously within nine months from the date of the order.

Smt. Sehrul Nisa Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 31

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 310 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Sehrul Nisa Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Pawan Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Shri Rajeev Kumar Sinha, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent no.1 and 2 and perused the record.

¶6

By filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner has requested to issue an order or direction to the opposite party no.2 i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Alapur, District Ambedkar Nagar to decide the Case No. T-2019040401222 (Surya Prakash Singh vs. Mohd. Shahid and others), under Section 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 expeditiously, within stipulated period of time fixed by this Court in accordance with law.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the abovementioned case was instituted by the opposite party no.4 and 5 under Section 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and originally the petitioner was not made a party and it was on an application moved by the petitioner she was made a party and thereafter moved an application for disposal of the suit on the point of maintainability. However, the application moved by the petitioner was dismissed on 10.12.2021.

¶8

It is further submitted that the issues in the above-mentioned case has been framed by the trial court and the case for the last many dates is fixed for the evidence of the plaintiffs, but the plaintiffs i.e. opposite party no.4 and 5 are deliberately not adducing their evidence before the court below and, therefore, a suitable direction be issued to the opposite party no.2 where the case is pending to dispose of the same expeditiously, within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel fairly submits that he would not be having any objection if any direction pertaining to expeditious disposal of the case pending before the respondent no.2 is issued. However, the petitioner should also be commanded to co-operate in the early disposal of the case.

¶10

Having regard to the order intended to be passed by this Court, issuance of notice to the opposite party no.3 i.e. Nagar Panchayat as well as private opposite parties no. 4 to 7 is hereby dispensed with as any direction pertaining to the expeditious disposal of the case pending before the respondent no.2 would also be in the interest of all.

¶11

Perusal of the record in the background of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties would reveal that earlier the petitioner had approached this Court by filing a writ petition (M/S) No. 3207 of 2021 and vide order dated 03.02.2021 passed herein, a direction was issued to the opposite party no.2 to consider and decide the application of the petitioner whereby the maintainability of the suit was challenged. However, the application so moved by the petitioner has not been dismissed vide order dated 10.12.2021. The only grievance of the petitioner appears to be that despite the issues have been framed by the trial court, the plaintiffs i.e. opposite party no.4 and 5 are deliberately not presenting/adducing their evidence before the trial court and deliberately keeping the case pending.

¶12

Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, there would not be any benefit in keeping the instant petition pending and the same is finally disposed of with the direction to the respondent no.2 i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Alapur, District Ambedkar Nagar to consider and finally decide the above-mentioned case expeditiously within a period of nine months from the date of an authenticated copy of this order is placed before the authority concerned, strictly in accordance with law, subject to cooperation of the parties, after providing an opportunity of being heard and led evidence to all the parties.

¶13

It is made clear that this Court has not considered the merits of the case.

¶14

Order Date :- 10.2.2022 Praveen

¶15

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR Date: 2022.02.11 09:59:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Sehrul Nisa v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sehrul Nisa v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko and 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

Sanjay Singh Vs Tehsildar, Tehsil Haidergarh,Barabanki and Others

Rajkumari Vs Sub District Magistrate Amethi Tehsil Amethi and Others

Akhilesh Kumar Bajapai Vs the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Kheri and 29 Others

Shiv Kumar Pandey and Another Vs State U.P. Thru. District Magistrate Gonda and Others

Shakuntala Yadav Vs Tehsildar Tehsil Alapur Ambedkar Nagar and Others

Jagdev Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Revenue Dept. Lko and Others