Disposed

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC28 Mar 2023WRIC/6835/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a mandamus to command the Additional Collector, Etah, to decide a pending revenue case expeditiously, directing conclusion within six months to prevent prejudice, with instructions to proceed even if lawyers do not cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No. 2 to conclude the proceedings within six months; provision for personal appearance if lawyers do not cooperate.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6835 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Krishna Kant Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Niraj Singh, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents as well as Shri Krishna Kant Singh, learned counsel representing the Gaon Sabha.

¶6

This petition has been filed seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent No.2 Additional Collector (Finance & Revenue), Etah to decide the objection dated 17.08.2022 (Annexure No. 5) filed in Case No. D202218210000310 (State vs Rajesh Kumar), under section 128 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

¶7

It is contended that Writ C No. 29814 of 2022 (Rajesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 others) was filed seeking expeditious disposal of the Case No. 310 of 2022, under section 128 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and during the course of hearing of the said writ petition, it was found that the said case had already been decided by order dated 13.10.2022, and therefore, the writ petition was consigned to record as having rendered infructuous.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid order dated 13.10.2022 was ex-parte, seeking recall whereof, he filed a recall application, which was allowed on 01.11.2022, and the proceedings of the aforesaid case were restored to its original number and status and have been renumbered as Case No. D202218210000310.

¶9

The grievance of the writ petitioner is that after restoration, the matter is pending and is not being decided.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

In view of the above, having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2, to conclude the proceedings of the aforesaid case, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.

¶13

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.

¶14

Order Date :- 28.3.2023 Sazia

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SAZIA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharam Dei Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Abdul Naseem Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mohd. Shamim Vs State of U.P. and 15 Others

Waziullah Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jaggannath Vs State of U.P. and 46 Others

Ishwar Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others