Disposed

Renu Gupta v. State of U.P. and 9 Others

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2023WRIC/7365/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought expeditious disposal of a revenue case pending for several years, alleging prejudice due to delay. The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the Sub Divisional Magistrate to conclude proceedings within four months, prioritizing personal appearance of parties if lawyers fail to cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Sub Divisional Magistrate to conclude the pending case within four months, permitting personal appearance if lawyers do not cooperate.

Renu Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7365 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Renu Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinay Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Sudhir Bharti

¶4

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Mahaveer Yadav, learned counsel holding brief of Shri V.K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents and Shri Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for the respondent-Gaon Sabha.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed seeking expeditious disposal of Case No.T-202305310302630 (Renu Gupta v. Govind Prasad & Ors.) under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code-2006 within stipulated period.

¶7

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.

¶8

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

¶9

In view of the above, having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondent no.2-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Tehsil-Sadar, District-Gorakhpur to conclude the proceedings of the aforesaid case expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him, after giving full opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶10

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.

¶11

Order Date :- 7.4.2023 Jyotsana

¶12

Digitally signed by :- JYOTSANA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Renu Gupta v. State of U.P. and 9 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Renu Gupta v. State of U.P. and 9 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

Dhanajit Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Lalta Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 14 Others

Mahendra Prasad Kushwaha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Rambaran Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mukesh Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Harivansh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others