Dismissed

Amir Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2022WRIC/26002/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the High Court disposed of the matter by directing the respondent Tehsildar to decide a restoration application within six weeks and the subsequent mutation case on merit within three months, ensuring no unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Tehsildar to decide restoration application within six weeks and mutation case within three months thereafter.

Amir Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 58

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 26002 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Amir Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhaskar Singh,Sunil Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Bhaskar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

¶6

The instant writ petition has been filed praying for a mandamus for the following reliefs:

¶7

(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondent No.2 (Tehsildar, Tehsil Ghosi, District Mau) shall decide the case No.33/429/2005-06 Computer Case No. T20061551212, under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Act (Amir Singh Vs. Nizamuddin) pending before Tehsildar Tehsil Ghosi District Mau along writ restoration application filed on 08.01.2019 and the same is on record and mentioned on the order sheet within stipulated period which may be specified by this Hon'ble Court.

¶8

(ii) issue any suitable order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that proceeding under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act was initiated at the instance of the petitioner in the year 2005-06. The proceeding remained pending and it was dismissed for non prosecution, thereafter a restoration application has been filed on 08.01.2019 by the petitioner, which is still pending for consideration before the respondent No.2.

¶10

Copy of the mutation application has been annexed as Annexure No.3 to the writ petition.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent No.2 i.e. Tehsildar, Tehsil Ghosi, District-Mau to first decide the restoration application dated 08.01.2019 within six weeks from the date of production of

¶12

certified copy of this order and after disposal of the restoration application dated 08.01.2019, respondent No.2 shall decide the mutation case on merit in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of disposal of restoration application dated 08.01.2019 after giving opportunity to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

¶13

Order Date :- 9.9.2022

¶14

PS*

¶15

Digitally signed by PRITI SHARMA Date: 2022.09.09 14:34:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amir Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amir Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Deopoojan Vs State of U.P. and 11 Others

Phool Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abhimanu Maurya Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Dinesh Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Umesh Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Sangeeta Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others