Disposed

Hakik Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2023WRIC/11866/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition filed by Hakik Ahmad against State of U.P. and others sought expeditious disposal of a pending revision application. The court directed the Commissioner Azamgarh to conclude proceedings within four months, permitting party appearance if lawyers fail to cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Direction to conclude proceedings of Revision No.818 of 2021 expeditively within four months, permitting party appearance if lawyers do not cooperate.

Hakik Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 52 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11866 of 2023 Petitioner :- Hakik Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd Hamid Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Rameshwar Prasad Shukla Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶2

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶3

This writ petition has been filed seeking expeditious disposal of Revision No.818 of 2021, Computerized Case No.C202115000000818 dated 18.08.2021 (Hakik Ahmad Vs. Narendra Singh) under Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within stipulated period.

¶4

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pendency of the aforesaid case is causing serious prejudice to the rights of the petitioner and therefore this Court should issue a direction for expeditious disposal of the case.

¶5

Learned Standing Counsel has no serious objection to the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶6

In view of the above, having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondent no.2-Commissioner Azamgarh, Division Azamgarh to conclude the proceedings of the aforesaid case expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him, after giving full opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶7

In case, the lawyers do not cooperate with the proceedings either on account of abstainment from work or otherwise, the court concerned shall permit personal appearance of the parties to address it on the merits of the aforesaid case. However, the authority/court concerned shall take special care of the fact that the property rights of the parties may not be adversely affected only on account of non-cooperation of the lawyers and the aforesaid matter shall be disposed of strictly in accordance with law, taking care of the statutory provisions and after making critical analysis of the material available on record.

¶8

Order Date :- 19.4.2023

¶9

Atul

¶10

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hakik Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hakik Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Udai Bhan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Sanju Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 13 Others

Laichi Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ram Pyare Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others