Disposed

Rajendra Kumar v. Deputy Director of Consolidation Distt. Ambedkar Nagar and 9 Others

Allahabad HC16 Feb 2024/140/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court dispensed with notice to private respondents and directed the revisional authority to consider the petitioner's application for interim relief. Court fixed a timeline for hearing without examining merit.

What did the court decide?

Directed the revisional authority to consider the petitioner's application for interim relief after hearing parties within six weeks.

Rajendra Kumar Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Distt… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:14029

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 140 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Rajendra Kumar Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation Distt. Ambedkar Nagar And 9 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Srivastava,Yogesh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no.1.

¶8

In view of the order proposed to be passed by the Court, notice to private respondents no. 2 to 10 is dispensed with.

¶9

Limited grievance of the petitioner is that he has filed a revision under Section 48 (1) of U.P. C.H. Act, 1953 on 17.10.2023. The said revision was admitted by the court on 07.11.2023 fixing 19.12.2023, however, the application for interim relief has not been considered. It is in the aforesaid circumstances, it is prayed that some direction be issued to the respondent no.1 to consider the application for interim relief preferred by the petitioner along with its revision and pending adjudication.

¶10

Considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending rather ends of justice can be met by directing the revisional authority to consider and decide the application for interim relief filed by the petitioner in the revision. It has been informed by the petitioner that 20.04.2024 is the next date fixed. Hence, if the petitioner moves an application for preponing the date, the same shall be considered appropriately so that the application for interim relief be considered and decided after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned but without granting any unnecessary adjournment, preferably within six weeks from the date the application for preponement along with this order is placed before the court.

¶11

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merit and the revisional court shall decide the said application strictly in accordance with law.

¶12

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 16.2.2024 KR

¶14

Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajendra Kumar v. Deputy Director of Consolidation Distt. Ambedkar Nagar and 9 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Kumar v. Deputy Director of Consolidation Distt. Ambedkar Nagar 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Maya Devi and 2 Others Vs Civil Judge Junior Division Court 13 Barabanki and 3 Others

Raees Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. and Others

Jhinka Devi and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Mahesh Datt Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Ram Shanker Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 2 Others

Vidya Singh Vs Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda and Others