Disposed

Balwant Singh v. Learned District Judge Bahraich and 7 Others

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2023/1361/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226 seeking to direct the tracing of missing original records of a regular suit, the High Court directed the District Judge to monitor the reconstruction efforts by a constituted committee. The court observed that appropriate action against the delinquent employee had been initiated and issued directions to obtain cooperation from the plaintiffs, threatening app

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Judge to monitor the reconstruction of records and issue appropriate judicial orders if plaintiffs fail to cooperate.

Balwant Singh Vs Learned District Judge… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:44993

¶2

Court No. - 20

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1361 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Balwant Singh Respondent :- Learned District Judge Bahraich And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Akshat Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. Tushar Mittal learned counsel holding brief on behalf of Mr. Gaurav Mehrotra learned counsel for High Court. In view of order being passed, notices to opposite parties stand dispensed with.

¶7

On 22nd March, 2023 following order had been passed:-

¶8

"Heard learned counsel for petitioner.

¶9

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking a specific direction to the court concerned for tracing out original records of the Regular Suit No.114 of 1994; Awadhesh and Anr. versus Sardar Pradhumn Singh and Ors.

¶10

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner is one of the defendants in the aforesaid suit but the original paper-book pertaining to the aforesaid suit has gone missing. As is evident from the order dated 03.12.2009 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Court No.2, Bahraich.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid submissions, office is directed to call for a report from the District Judge, Bahraich pertaining to the aforesaid prayer, the steps taken to unearth the original records and action taken against the relevant staff for original records having gone missing. List this case on 04.04.2023, as fresh along with the said report."

¶12

Subsequently on 8th May, 2023 following order had been passed:-

¶13

"In pursuance of direction issued earlier, the learned District Judge has submitted his report dated 05th May, 2023 indicating that despite all possible efforts regarding reconstruction of record, only two papers, i.e. A114 and C117 have been made available by Advocates of both parties. It is also indicated in the enquiry that one Smt. Manjula Pathak has been prima facie found responsible for loss of records. However, the record does not indicate any further disciplinary action having been taken against the person who is stated to be prima facie responsible for loss of records.

¶14

Learned counsel for petitioner also submits that some time may be granted for furnishing all documents before the Official concerned for reconstruction of records.

¶15

As prayed, list this case on 12th July, 2023 as fresh.

¶16

Office is directed to obtain fresh report from the learned District Judge concerned regarding further action taken for reconstruction of records as well as disciplinary action against the Officer found prima facie responsible."

¶17

In pursuance thereof, report dated 10th July, 2023 has been furnished indicating the fact that in the non judicial inquiry No.6 of 2023, report dated 2nd May, 2023 by the inquiry officer has recorded a finding that one Smt. Manjula Pathak who was custodian of the record was prima facie responsible for loss of record but since she has already superannuated on 31st January, 2018 therefore permission from His Excellency Governor of U.P. has been sought under Article 351-A of the Civil Service Regulations for initiation of departmental inquiry.

¶18

Report also states that copy of the original sale deed dated 21st June, 1996 has been made available by the Sub Registrar, Bahraich on 4th July, 2023 but the record of suit could not be completely reconstructed since the complete record is not available with the court concerned and also could not be provided by either the plaintiffs or the defendants. The report also states that all endeavour shall be made to construct the record within a period of 15 days.

¶19

Learned counsel for petitioner/defendant has submitted that plaintiffs themselves are not interested in pursuing the matter and they have not taken any step to provide a copy of suit proceedings while admitting that copies of the suit proceedings are not available with the defendants either.

¶20

Considering aforesaid facts, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present petition pending. Appropriate action with regard to delinquent employee has already been taken and so far as records of the regular suit No.114 of 1991 is concerned, the committee which has been constituted is making all efforts to re-constitute the record. The learned District Judge concerned is directed to monitor with the constitution of suit proceedings. It is also made clear that in case the plaintiff does not cooperate in reconstitution of records, appropriate orders on the judicial side with regard to suit proceedings may also be passed.

¶21

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition is disposed of.

¶22

Order Date :- 12.7.2023 prabhat

¶23

Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Balwant Singh v. Learned District Judge Bahraich and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwant Singh v. Learned District Judge Bahraich and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chaudhari Pramesh Kumar Singh and 3 Others Vs the District Judge Unnao and 13 Others

Ranjan Kumar Vs Civil Judge Junior Division Kunda Distt. Pratapgarh

Smt. Geeta Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Stamp Registration Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Geeta Pandey Vs Raghvendra Datt Ram Pandey and another

Atul Kumar Singh Vs Commissioner Faizabad Division and 2 Others

Shashi Prakash Pandey Vs Principal Judge Family Court District Lucknow and Another