Disposed¶13

Ram Piyare Singh v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC21 Mar 2022WRIB/231/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

U.P. Revenue Code 2006; Section 34; Section 35(2); Section 210; U.P. Revenue Act 2006; Naib Tehsildar Sarai Akil Tehsil-Chayal Kaushambi; Sub Divisional Magistrate Tehsil-Chayal; Commissioner Prayagraj Division; cancellation of order; opportunity of hearing; remand for fresh decision; expeditious conclusion of proceedings; four months; Case No.02127 of 2019; Case No.REV/1681/2021/Kaushambi; writ disposed at admission stage with consent; Certiorari; Writ - B No. 231 of 2022; Prakash Padia J.; Allahabad High Court; order date 21.3.2022.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the authority concerned (Naib Tehsildar, Sarai Akil, Tehsil-Chayal, Kaushambi, in Case No.02127 of 2019) to conclude the proceedings expeditiously and preferably within four months in accordance with law, without interfering with the impugned orders. ¶13

Ram Piyare Singh Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of Certiorari should issue quashing the orders dated 6.12.2021 (respondent no.2), 19.8.2021 (respondent no.3) and 16.4.2021 (respondent no.4) passed under Sections 210 and 35(2) of the U.P. Revenue Act, 2006. +1 more

¶7

Court's answer

The Court made no interference with the orders under challenge in the petition, thereby declining the quashing relief sought.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage itself with a direction to the authority concerned to conclude the proceedings expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months, in accordance with law.

¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ - B No. 231 of 2022, Ram Piyare Singh v. State of U.P. and 7 others (High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Prakash Padia, J., order dated 21.3.2022): The petitioner, who had obtained an order in his favour dated 30.10.2019 from the Naib Tehsildar, Sarai Akil under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, challenged by Certiorari the orders dated 16.4.2021 (respondent no.4, Case No.00349/2020, s.35(2)), 19.8.2021 (respondent no.3, Commissioner Prayagraj Division, Case No.622/2021, s.210) and 6.12.2021 (respondent no.2, Case No.REV/1681/2021/Kaushambi, s.210) of the U.P. Revenue Act 2006, by which his favourable order was cancelled on the finding that proper opportunity of hearing had not been afforded to the respondents' counsel and the matter was remanded for fresh decision. During arguments counsel restricted the prayer to a direction for expeditious conclusion of Case No.02127 of 2019 before the Naib Tehsildar. With the consent of counsel, the petition was disposed of at the admission stage without interfering with the impugned orders, directing the authority concerned to conclude the proceedings expeditiously, preferably within four months, in accordance with law.

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 231 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Ram Piyare Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Mishra,Reetika Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶6

The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayer :-

¶7

"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned dated 6.12.2021 passed by the respondent no-2 in Case No.REV/1681/2021/ Kaushambi (Computer No AL20210242001681 Ram Piyare Singh Versus Satyawan Singh and others under section 210 U.P. Revenue Act 2006 and order dated 19.8.2021 passed by the respondent no-3 in Case No.622/2021 (Computer No C202102000000622 Satyawan Singh and others Vs. Ram Piyare Singh and others under section 210 U.P. Revenue Act 2006 as well as order dated 16.4.2021 passed by the respondent no-4 in Case No.00349/2020 (Computer No T202002420500349 Satyavan Versus Rampiyare under section 35(2) U.P. Revenue Act 2006, (Contained in Annexure No. 14, 12 and 10 to this writ petition)."

¶8

In the proceeding initiated by the petitioner under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 an order was passed in his favour by the Naib Tehsildar, Sarai Akil, Tehsil-Chayal, Kaushambi on 30.10.2019. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, respondent no.6 filed an appeal as provided under sub Section 2 of Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil-Chayal, District Kaushambi. In the said appeal an order was passed by him on 16.04.2021 cancelling the order passed in favour of the petitioner. Further matter was remanded back by him to the court of Naib Tehsildar to decide the matter afresh after providing opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned. Not satisfied with the aforesaid order, the respondent no.6 initiated the proceedings as provided under Section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. In the aforesaid proceedings an order was passed by the Commissioner Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj/respondent no.3 on 19.08.2021 affirming the order passed by the S.D.M. Findings were recorded by the aforesaid authorities to the effect that while passing the order dated 30.10.2019 proper opportunity of hearing was not provided to the counsel appearing on behalf of

¶9

the respondents. In this view of the matter, directions were given to the parties to appear in the court of Tehsildar, concerned and court of Tehsildar, concerned was further directed to decide the matter afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶10

After some arguments a prayer has been made by the counsel for the petitioner only to the effect that a direction be issued to Naib Tehsildar, Sarai Akil, Tehsil-Chayal, Kaushambi to conclude the proceedings being Case No.02127 of 2019 expeditiously.

¶11

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.

¶12

Without interfering in the orders, which are under challenge in the present petition, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the authority concerned to conclude the proceedings expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months in accordance with law.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations, present writ petition stands disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 21.3.2022 Pramod Tripathi

¶15

Digitally signed by PRAMOD TRIPATHI Date: 2022.03.23 10:40:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Piyare Singh v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Piyare Singh v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhan Pal Singh Vs Rama Raman Chief Exe. Officer Greator Noida G.B. Nagar

Harakhu Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Salamat Ali Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others

Om Prakash and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Seetaram Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Suresh Kumar Vs Commissioner and 6 Others