Disposed

Smt. Sheela Devi v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC24 May 2023WRIC/9976/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition directing the SubDivisional Officer to receive a fresh application from the petitioner regarding possession. The court mandated the SubDivisional Magistrate to complete the exercise of delivering actual possession within one month.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to file a fresh application for possession recovery; SDM mandated to deliver possession within one month.

Smt. Sheela Devi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:116386

¶2

Court No. - 52

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9976 of 2020

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Sheela Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Mishra,Ashok Kumar Tripathi,Manoj Kumar Tripathi,Vinod Kumar Tirpathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶7

This petition has been filed claiming following reliefs:-

¶8

"I. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3, i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate Phoolpur Prayagraj to handover the legal possession in pursuance of order dated 27.08.2018 passed by respondent no.3, i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate Phoolpur Prayagraj and its decree dated 06.09.2018 in Case No. 1124 of 2016 (Computerize Case No. T20160203024760) Sheela Devi Versus Farid and others under section 116 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

¶9

II. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3 i.e. sub Divisional Magistrate Phoolpur Prayagraj to decide petitioner application/representation dated 29.07.2019 and 22.02.2020 in accordance with law within a very short period."

¶10

It is contended that the S.D.M., Phoolpur, District Prayagraj filed an affidavit stating that possession has been delivered to the petitioner and on the basis of the said affidavit, the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous by order dated 23.07.2020, however, the said order was later on recalled on 26.03.2021.

¶11

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that till today possession has not been delivered to the petitioner and for this very reason the order was recalled.

¶12

Be that as it may, no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping this matter pending and therefore the writ petition is disposed of in following terms:-

¶13

(a) The petitioner shall file a fresh application before the SubDivisional Officer in respect of the factual and legal position which the petitioner is alleging before this Court annexing

¶14

therewith relevant documents along with certified copy of this order.

¶15

(b) In case such an application is filed within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered in accordance with law after hearing the respondent no.5 (Farid).

¶16

(c) S.D.M. concerned shall ensure that the rights of any parties i.e. the petitioner or private respondent are not adversely affected and the same be protected in accordance with law.

¶17

(d) In case there is no factual or legal impediment in delivery of possession to the petitioner pursuant to the decree which, according to the petitioner, has attained finality, actual and physical possession in terms of the decree shall be delivered to the petitioner.

¶18

(E) The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of one month from the date of submission of application.

¶19

Order Date :- 24.5.2023 AKShukla/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Sheela Devi v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sheela Devi v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Ram Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Hari Lal Vs State of U P and 15 Others

Smt. Rita Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bramhanand Builders Private Limited Vs State of U P and 3 Others

M/S Manju Shree Agency Limited Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Devendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others