Dismissed

Indu Devi(Rai) v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2023WRIC/4312/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought directions for expeditious disposal of a pending mutation case under Section 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The court, without opining on merits, directed the Tehsildar to decide the matter within six months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Tehsildar Sadar, Tehsil Ballia to dispose of Mutation Case No. 9828/2022 within six months by a reasoned order.

Indu Devi(Rai) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Municipal and Town Planning | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4312 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Indu Devi(Rai) Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Girdhar Prasad Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- CSC

¶4

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel representing the State respondents and perused the record.

¶6

The instant writ petition has been filed, interalia, for the following relief:-

¶7

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to respondents (specially respondent no.2) to decide the Mutation Case No. 9828/2022 Computer Case No. T202215090309828 (Indu Devi Vs. Janmejay Rai) under Section 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 pending since 2022 expeditiously."

¶8

The case of the petitioner is that the father of the petitioner Sri Janmejay Rai executed registered Will in favour of the petitioner on 18.11.2011. The father of the petitioner died on 04.06.2012 and thereafter, the petitioner filed mutation application before the respondent no.2, Tehsildar Sadar, Tehsil Ballia, District- Ballia. Meanwhile, respondent no.4 has filed his objection, however, he has nothing to do with the said mutation case. It is further submitted that the aforesaid mutation case is pending consideration and the concerned court is not paying heed upon the request of the petitioner as has been stated in paragraph 12 of the writ petition.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the extent a direction be issued for expeditious disposal of the case within stipulated period as fixed by this Court.

¶10

In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served to keep this matter pending, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition, without making any observation on the merits of the case as mentioned in the present writ petition, with a direction to Tehsildar Sadar, Tehsil Ballia, District- Ballia (respondent No. 2), before whom the aforementioned matter is pending disposal, to decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously and

¶11

preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶12

It is expected that it should be decided by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 13.2.2023

¶15

Abhishek Gupta

¶16

(Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indu Devi(Rai) v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indu Devi(Rai) 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

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Thru. Branch Manager vs Rameshwar @ Rameshwar Prasad Yadav and 3 Others

Smt. Geeta Devi and 3 Others vs Smt. Rita Singh and 2 Others

Imrana Khatoon Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shivbhola Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Hemlata Yadav Vs State of U P and 3 Others