Disposed

Smt.Tarawati v. State of U.P. and 2 Other

Allahabad HC31 Oct 2023WRIB/3605/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition directed at the Board of Revenue, Kolkata, for deciding a pending revision under Section 219 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 within six months. The Court issued a direction for speedy disposal without adjudicating on the merits of the underlying revision.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Board of Revenue to decide the pending revision within six months with a reasoned order after an opportunity of hearing.

Smt.Tarawati Vs State of U.P. and 2 Other — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:211534

¶2

E-court

¶3

Court No. - 49

¶4

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 3605 of 2023

¶5

Petitioner :- Smt.Tarawati Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Other Counsel for Petitioner :- Dwijendra Prasad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Dwijendra Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ashok Kumar Sonkar, learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents no.1 & 2 and perused the record.

¶8

The instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia, for the following relief:

¶9

"(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow to decide Revision No.2246 of 2013-14 (Computerized Case No. R20141821002246) (Smt. Tarawati vs. State of U.P. and others) under Section 219 of U.P.Land Revenue Act, 1901, filed by the petitioner within stipulated time fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶10

(ii) ................................

¶11

(iii) ..............................."

¶12

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that Revision No.2246 of 2013-14, under Section 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901, is pending for disposal since 2014 before the Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow. He submits that the petitioner is suffering hardship because of the pendency of the aforesaid case.

¶13

Para 458 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual provides as under:

¶14

" 458. Speedy Disposal- (1) The court shall endeavour to finally decide the suit within a period of one year from the date of institution of the suit and if the suit is not decided within the period aforesaid, the reason for the same shall be recorded.

¶15

(2) The appellate or the revisional court shall endeavour to finally decide the appeal or revision, as the case may be, within a period of six months from the date of filing the appeal or revision and if the appeal or revision is not decided within the aforesaid period, the reason for the same shall be recorded. "

¶16

There is a clear legislative mandate that if proceedings are not concluded within the period of time as provided under the aforesaid provision, reasons for the same shall be recorded.

¶17

Learned Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection to the extent that a direction is issued by this Court for expeditious disposal of the above mentioned case, within stipulated period as fixed by this Court.

¶18

In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, the service of notice upon the respondent no.3 is dispensed with.

¶19

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this writ petition pending.

¶20

Accordingly, without adverting on merits of the case and with the consent of the parties, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition, with a direction to the learned Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow (respondent No. 2), before whom the Case No. REV/2246/2014 (Computerized Case No. R20141821002246) is pending for disposal, to decide the same strictly in accordance with law, by a reasoned and speaking order

¶21

on merit, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, unless there is any legal impediment. It is further directed that no unnecessary adjournments be granted to either of the parties, if prayed for, will be permissible to be granted only in exceptional circumstances.

¶22

With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is disposed of .

¶23

Order Date :- 31.10.2023 Abhishek Gupta

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt.Tarawati v. State of U.P. and 2 Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Tarawati v. State of U.P. and 2 Other

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

Nagendra Singh Vs District Magistrate / Collector and 11 Others

Sri Nivas Rai and Another Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Raisa Begum Vs Board of Revenue and 6 Others

Rohit and 10 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Shamsun Nisha Vs Board of Revenue U.P. at Allahabad and 11 Others

Nripendra Shah Vs Board of Revenue Allahabad and 6 Others