Disposed

Smt. Seema Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023WRIC/2841/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking direction to decide a long-pending recall application against an ex-parte mutation order. The court directed the Tehsildar to decide the recall application expeditiously within four months after producing the certified copy, ensuring an opportunity of hearing. The petition was disposed of on 7.2.2023.

What did the court decide?

Directed Tehsildar to decide the pending recall application within four months after production of certified copy without unnecessary adjournments.

Smt. Seema Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2841 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Seema Devi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anwar Ali Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anwar Ali, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶6

Present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent no.3/ Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District Ballia to decide the Case No.RST/05665/2019 (Computerized Case No.T201915090305665) (Seema Devi and another vs. Vashishth and others) under Section 209(J) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within a stipulated time period.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that names of respondent no.4 and 5 were mutated vide order dated 23.11.2009 without any notice and opportunity to the petitioners. It is further submitted that order dated 23.11.2009 is ex-parte and therefore, petitioners had filed recall application on 22.4.2010 for recall of ex-parte order dated 23.11.2009 which is still pending for disposal. It is stated in paragraph 5 of the petition that respondent nos. 4 and 5 have put in appearance before the authority but only dates have been fixed and the recall application is still pending for disposal since 2020.

¶8

Without going into merit of the case, it is appropriate that the above recall application be decided expeditiously.

¶9

In view of above, respondent no.3/Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District Ballia is directed to decide the aforesaid recall application after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned expeditiously, if possible within four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting adjournment unnecessarily to either of the parties, unless there is any legal impediment.

¶10

With aforesaid direction, the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is finally disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 P.P.

¶12

Digitally signed by :- POONAM PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Seema Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Seema Devi and Another 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

Ravi Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lalta Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashish Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 14 Others

Pankaj Gautam and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Jagdish Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Hansraj Vs State of U P and 3 Others