Allowed

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

Allahabad HC21 Mar 2022WRIB/64/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction to the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gorakhpur, to decide a pending restoration application within four months. The High Court directed the respondent to consider and decide the application expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No.2 to decide the pending restoration application within four months, after giving parties an opportunity and without unnecessary adjournments.

Om Prakash and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 64 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Om Prakash And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kaushlendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Standing counsel for the State respondent.

¶6

The present writ petition has been filed for mandamus commanding and directing the Respondent No.2/ Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gorakhpur, to decide the restoration application dated 26.9.2019, filed by the petitioners in Revision No. 1830/282 (Gulab Vs. Shyam Prakash) pending in the court of Upper Collector (Nagar), Gorakhpur/Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gorkhpur, within the stipulated period of time.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioners that the restoration application dated 26.9.2019 has been filed by petitioners but no decision has been taken till date on the restoration application of the petitioners.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and an appropriate direction may be issued to respondent no.2 to consider the grievance of the petitioners.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the respondent No.2/Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gorakhpur to consider and decide the aforesaid application in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order but certainly after giving opportunity to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment.

¶10

Order Date :- 21.3.2022 Kamarjahan

¶11

Digitally signed by KAMARJAHAN ANSARI Date: 2022.03.23 15:30:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

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

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

Suresh Kumar Vs Commissioner and 6 Others