Allowed

Ishwar Das v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Nov 2023WRIB/3798/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed seeking expedited disposal of a pending revenue revision. Court issued direction to Board of Revenue at Prayagraj to decide the case within six months, recording reasons for delay if applicable, without going into merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Board of Revenue at Prayagraj to decide Revision No. 2242/2022 within six months and record reasons for delay.

Ishwar Das Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:217053

¶2

Court No. - 49

¶3

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 3798 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Ishwar Das Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahendra Pratap Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Deepak Gaur

¶5

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Mahendra Pratap Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri T.P. Gupta, learned Standing Counsel representing respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Deepak Gaur, learned counsel for Gram Sabha / respondent No. 4 and perused the record.

¶7

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

¶8

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Board of Revenue, U.P. at Prayagraj (Allahabad) (respondent no. 2) to decide the case/Revision No. 2242/2022, Computerized Case No. AL20220635002242 (Gayatri Devi Vs. Ishwar Das and others) under Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, pending in his court expeditiously preferably within the stipulated period as prescribed by this Hon'ble Court."

¶9

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is the respondent in the pending revision before the learned Board of Revenue, U.P. at Prayagraj (respondent no. 2) since 10.08.2022. He submits that because of the pendency of the revision, the petitioner is facing hardship and as such the disposal of the revision may be expedited in the interest of justice.

¶10

Sub-rule 4 of Rule 183 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2016 provides as under:

¶11

"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."

¶12

There is a clear legislative mandate that if proceedings are not

¶13

concluded within the period of time as provided under the aforesaid provision, reasons for the same shall be recorded.

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

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 Board of Revenue, U.P. at Prayagraj (Allahabad) (respondent no. 2), before whom the aforementioned matter is pending for disposal, to decide the case/Revision No. 2242/2022, Computerized Case No. AL20220635002242 (Gayatri Devi Vs. Ishwar Das and others) under Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, strictly in accordance with law, by a reasoned and speaking order 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 will be granted to either of the parties.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 9.11.2023 Anjali

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ishwar Das v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ishwar Das 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Daya Kishan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Murari Pandey and Another Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Vijay Kumar Yadav and Another Vs Board of Revenue and 12 Others

Mohini Awasthi and Another vs Umesh Kumar and 2 Others

Shamsuddin Vs Board of Revenue and 7 Others

Anwari Begum Vs State of U.P. and 13 Others