Petitioner, a purchaser, sought expedited disposal of revenue case No. 3104 of 2021 under the U.P. Revenue Code to address undue delay. Respondents consented; court directed Tehsildar to decide within three months.
Direction to Respondent No. 2 to decide Case No. 3104 of 2021 under Sec. 35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within three months.
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. - 19
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 28838 of 2022
Petitioner :- Mohammad Khalid Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhawesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rameshwar Prasad Shukla
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Supplementary afÏdavit filed today, is taken on record.
Heard Sri Bhawesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Shashi Prakash Singh,, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents and Sri Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4.
The petitioner claiming himself to be a purchaser has filed the present petition seeking a direction to the Respondent no. 2/Tehsildar, Tehsil Budhanpur, District Azamgarh to decide the Case No. 3104 of 2021, Computerized Case No. T202115060603104, (Mohammad Khalid vs. Irshad Ahmad) under Section 35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within a stipulated period.
Counsel for the petitioner has referred to the order sheet of the case, copy whereof has been appended along with the petition and the supplementary afÏdavit, to contend that although various dates are being fixed for hearing but for some reason or the other the matter is being adjourned and the delay in disposal of the said case is causing undue hardship to the petitioner. Accordingly, a prayer is made to expedite the proceedings.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Staterespondents has no objection to the prayer so made.
In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the present petition is disposed of with an observation that in case the petitioner appears before the respondent no. 2 and does not seek any unnecessary adjournment it is expected that the respondent no. 2 would make an endeavour to decide the aforesaid case in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order, provided there is no other legal impediment.
Order Date : - 29.9.2022 Puspendra
(Dr. Y.K. Srivastava, J.)
Digitally signed by PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH Date: 2022.09.29 18:27:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a direction should be issued to the Tehsildar to decide the acquisition case within a stipulated period to avoid undue delay.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohammad Khalid
State Of U.P.
Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
