In a writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction for the expedited disposal of mutation proceedings initiated in 2020 under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which remained undetermined beyond the statutory 90-day limit.
Direction to the Naib Tehsildar to decide the mutation case within three months without unnecessary adjournments.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:142467
Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21834 of 2023
Petitioner :- Anjali Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vivek Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
Heard Shri Vivek Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
Considering the nature of the controversy involved in the present writ petition, the service of notice upon the private respondents are being dispensed with.
The limited prayer made by the petitioner in the present writ petition is for issuance of an appropriate direction to the respondent No. 2, Naib Tehsildar Duddhi, Tehsil Tamkuhiraj, District Kushinagar to decide Case No. 05634/2019 (Computerized Case No. T202005440304220) (Saravri Begam versus Kabutan Nesha) under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within the stipulated period of time.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that mutation proceedings were initiated since 2020 and after putting appearance by the respondents, the objection has been filed by respondent Nos. 4 & 5, but the case has not been decided till date.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also invited the attention of the Court towards the provisions of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and submits that mutation proceedings are required to be decided at the earliest and the statute provided that such proceedings should be brought to its logical end within a period of 90 days. He submits that period of 90 days has since been expired and, therefore, appropriate directions be issued to the respondent No. 2 to decide the proceedings.
Considering the innocuous prayer made by the petitioner for expeditious disposal of the mutation proceedings and also taking into consideration the fact that the period provided under the statute has since been expired, the writ petition is disposed of by
requiring the respondent No. 2, Naib Tehsildar Duddhi, Tehsil Tamkuhiraj, District Kushinagar seized with the Case No. 05634/2019 (Computerized Case No. T202005440304220) (Saravri Begam versus Kabutan Nesha), under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 to consider and decide the same expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties within a period of three months from the date of service of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 18.7.2023
Ravi / pks
Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for expeditious disposal of mutation proceedings pending under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anjali Devi
State Of U.P.
Naib Tehsildar Duddhi
Ashutosh Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
