Allowed

Mainuddin v. Sub Divisional Officer Utraula Balrampur and 13 Others

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2023/6395/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction under Article 227 to Sub Divisional Officer Utraala to decide a pending recall/restoration application filed in 2014 under U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act within three months. Court directed the authority to decide the matter after affording hearing to all parties.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.1 directed to decide the recall/restoration application dated 24.5.2014 within three months after affording opportunity of hearing.

Mainuddin Vs Sub Divisional Officer… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:84951

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6395 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Mainuddin

¶5

Respondent :- Sub Divisional Officer Utraula Balrampur And 13 Others

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Panna Lal Gupta,Haider Mehdi,Subrat Gupta

¶7

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta

¶8

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶10

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for directing the respondent no.1 the Sub Divisional Officer, Utraula, District Balrampur to decide the recall/restoration application dated 24.5.2014 filed by the petitioner in Case No.302 "Gulsehra Vs. Mohd. Umar & others" under Section 229 (B) of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, pending since 24.5.2014 in the court of Sub Divisional Officer, Utraula, District Balrampur expeditiously, within stipulated period of time, in accordance with law.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter pertains to the year 2014, but, the proceeding of the case has not been concluded yet.

¶12

After arguing at length, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that interest of justice would be sub-served if this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no.1 to decide the matter within the stipulated period of time as may be fixed by this Court.

¶13

Learned State counsel has no objection to the submission

¶14

aforesaid.

¶15

Considering aforesaid innocuous prayer, the respondent no.1 is directed to decide the recall/restoration application dated 24.5.2014 filed by the petitioner in Case No.302 "Gulsehra Vs. Mohd. Umar & others" under Section 229 (B) of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, within a period of three months, from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it, in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, if there is no legal impediment.

¶16

The aforesaid order is subject to the co-operation of the petitioner.

¶17

It is further provided that the authority concerned shall not grant any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶18

With the aforesaid observations, the instant petition stands disposed of.

¶19

Order Date :- 21.12.2023 Ram Murti

¶20

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mainuddin v. Sub Divisional Officer Utraula Balrampur and 13 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mainuddin v. Sub Divisional Officer Utraula Balrampur and 13 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

Sri Kant Vs U.P. Ziladikari Tehsil Kunda Distt. Pratapgarh and 9 Others

Sudhir Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 8 Others

Babulal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Narayan Pal Singh Vs Consolidation Officer Distt. Faizabad / Ayodhya and 13 Others

Mohammad Naqi and Others Vs Board of Revenue, Lucknow Thru. Chairman and Others

Mohd. Mobeen Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Rural Development,Lko. and 4 Others