The petition seeking relief on delayed appeal under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act refused. The petition was dismissed voluntarily as withdrawn by the petitioner with liberty to file fresh petition.
Petition dismissed as withdrawn by the petitioner with liberty to file a fresh petition.
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. - 4
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 519 of 2022
Petitioner :- Tilak Dhari Respondent :- Settlement OfÏcer Consolidation And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sachida Nand Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present petition has been filed praying for direction to the Settlement OfÏcer of Consolidation, Gorakhpur to expeditiously decide the appeal filed by the petitioner under section 11 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act 1953 which the petitioner states had been filed in the year 2005. The order sheet annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition reveals that the appeal had been dismissed in default but was restored on 11.10.2018 on the restoration application filed by the petitioner. The date when the appeal was dismissed in default as well as the date when the restoration application was filed has not been stated in the petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the petition be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition giving the necessary details. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed.
Order Date :- 23.3.2022 Puspendra
Digitally signed by PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH Date: 2022.03.23 17:40:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Tilak Dhari
Settlement Officer Consolidation and 6 Others
Salil Kumar Rai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
