The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a direction to expedite a mutation case under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, directing the Tehsildar to decide it within six months.
Directed the Tehsildar to decide the mutation case within six months after hearing parties and recording evidence.
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. - 31
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 334 of 2022
Petitioner :- Smt. Usha Devi Dubey Respondent :- Tehsildar Sohawal And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Angrej Nath Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Heard Shri Angrej Nath Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Shri Dev Prakash Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1 and perused the record.
By filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner has requested to issue an order or direction directing the respondent no.1 i.e. Tehsildar, Sohawal, District Ayodhya to expeditiously decide the Case No.T202004230201206 filed on 16.06.2020, under Section 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for mutation on the basis of registered sale deed executed by the recorded tenure holder namely Rakesh Kumar son of Shiv Shankar in respect of Gata No.353, area 0.253 hectare situated at Village Kadipur, Pargana - Haveli Awadh, Tehsil Sohawal, District Ayodhya within the time stipulated by this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a mutation case instituted by the petitioner pertaining to the mutation of his name is pending before the respondent no.1 since 2020. The respondent no.2 and 3 have filed objections and they are trying hard to keep the mutation case pending while having regard to sub rule 7 of Rule 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, it is an endeavour of the respondent no.1 to decide the mutation case within a period of 90 days, even if the same is disputed. It is vehemently submitted that a suitable direction be given to the respondent no.1 to dispose of the above mentioned mutation case expeditiously within the time stipulated by this Court.
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.1 is issued.
Having regard to the order intended to be passed by this Court, issuance of notice to the private respondent(s) no.2 to 4 is hereby dispensed with as any direction pertaining to the expeditious disposal of the case pending before the respondent no.1 would also be in their interest.
Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no.1 i.e. Tehsildar, Sohawal, District Ayodhya to consider and finally decide the above mentioned case after providing an opportunity of being heard to the parties as well as to led evidence, most expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournments to either parties, preferably within a period of six months from the date an authenticated copy of this order is placed before the authority concerned, strictly in accordance with law, subject to the cooperation by the parties.
It is made clear that this Court has not considered the merits of the case.
Order Date :- 11.2.2022 Anupam S/-
Digitally signed by ANUPAM SINGH PATEL Date: 2022.02.11 17:40:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Petitioner is entitled to a direction for expeditious disposal of a pending mutation case under Section 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Usha Devi Dubey
Tehsildar Sohawal
Other Respondents
Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
