Disposed

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

Allahabad HC30 Jan 2023WRIC/3124/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition was filed directing the Sub-Divisional Officer to conclude demarcation proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within four months by avoiding unreasonable delays.

What did the court decide?

The Petitioner was directed to affordan opportunity of hearing and decide the pending case within four months without unnecessary adjournments, if no legal impediment exists.

Ashish Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 14 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 51 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3124 of 2023 Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 14 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kapil Dev Yadav,Rakesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶3

Heard Mr. Uday Shankar Chauhan, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Rakesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for State respondent and perused the record.

¶4

Present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking a direction to the Sub Divisinoal Officer, Tehsil - Phoolpur, District - Prayagraj (respondent no.2) to conclude the proceedings of Case No. 158 (Ashish Kumar & others Vs. Gaon Sabha & others), under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within a stipulated time period.

¶5

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner and one Sanjeev Kumar had purchased the Arazi No. 628 area 0.228 situated in Mauja Amiliya, Pargana Sikandara, Tehsil Phoolpur, District Prayagraj on 3.3.2021 through registered sale deed. The names of petitioner and Sanjeev Kumar had already been mutated in revenue record. The petitioner and Sanjeev Kumar had jointly filed an application under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 on 13.9.2021 for demarcation of their shares which was registered as Case No. 158. The survey was conducted on 25.8.2022. Afsari Begum and Nidhilal have filed objections to the survey report on 22.10.2022 and on account of delaying tactics adopted by the contesting respondents, the proceedings of case could not be concluded and is pending since 13.9.2021.

¶6

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

¶7

In view of above, Sub Divisinoal Officer, Tehsil - Phoolpur, District - Prayagraj (respondent no.2) is directed to decide the proceedings of the aforesaid case expeditiously, if possible within four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, without granting adjournment unnecessarily to either of the parties, unless there is any legal impediment.

¶8

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

¶9

Order Date :- 30.1.2023/Arif

¶10

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Kumar v. State of U.P. and 14 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

Janardan Rai Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Shyam Bihari Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Ram Kripal Navik Alias Ram Kripal Nishad Vs State of U P and 11 Others

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

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

Jay Hanuman Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others