Disposed

Mohd. Irfan v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2023WRIC/8844/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought an order for the expeditious disposal of a pending mutation case. The High Court disposed of the petition by directing the Tehsildar to conclude the proceedings within five months, ensuring full opportunity for hearing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no.2-Tehsildar to conclude the proceedings of Mutation Case No.5176 of 2021 expeditiously within five months.

Mohd. Irfan Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8844 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Mohd. Irfan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shadab Ali Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶5

Heard Ms. Sazia Parveen, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Shadab Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents.Sabha

¶6

This writ petition has been filed seeking expeditious disposal of Mutation Case No.5176 of 2021 (Computerized Case No.T-202102030305176) under Section 34 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-Tehsildar, Tehsil-Soraon, District-Prayagraj to conclude the proceedings of the aforesaid case expeditiously, preferably, within a period of five 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 :- 12.4.2023

¶12

Jyotsana

¶13

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

Mohd. Irfan v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Irfan v. State of U.P. and 5 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

Ram Khelawan Pal Vs State of U.P. and 20 Others

Motilal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Markandey Rai Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Smt. Malti Devi Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Ramdas and 11 Others Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others