Sonkali Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

Sonkali Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application before respondent no. 2 for early disposal of her objections against the recall application in mutation case Computerized No. T202204040403948; respondent no. 2 expected to decide such urgency application expeditiously in accordance with law, after hearing the parties and without unnecessary adjournments.

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction should issue to respondent no. 2 (Tehsildar, Tehsil Aalapur, District Ambekar Nagar) to decide, within a stipulated time, the mutation case Computerized No. T202204040403948 under Section 34 Revenue Code, 2006 (Sonkali Vs. Baran) and the objections pending therein against the recall application. +1 more

Court's answer

Without entering into the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of the objections against the recall application pending before respondent no. 2.

Ratio / Principle

If such urgency application is preferred, respondent no. 2 is expected to decide it expeditiously in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without providing any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Mutation - delay - Article 227 (High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Manish Kumar, J., Order Date 2.5.2024, MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2193 of 2024): Petitioner Sonkali sought a direction to the Tehsildar, Tehsil Aalapur, District Ambekar Nagar (respondent no. 2) to decide the objections filed on 03.11.2023 against the recall application filed on 11.10.2023 by respondent no. 3 in mutation case Computerized No. T202204040403948 under Section 34 Revenue Code, 2006 (Sonkali Vs. Baran), the mutation order having been passed on 05.04.2023. Counsel for the petitioner conceded that no urgency application had been moved before the court below. Without entering into the merits, the petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application; respondent no. 2 is expected to decide such application expeditiously in accordance with law, after opportunity of hearing and without unnecessary adjournments.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:34136

Court No. - 18

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2193 of 2024

Petitioner :- Sonkali

Respondent :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Prasad Nigam Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

Heard.

Present petition has been preferred with the following main relief:-

" to issue order or direction directing to the opposite party no. 2 i.e. the Tehsildar, Tehsil, Aalapur, District Ambekar Nagar to decide the mutation case Computerized No. T202204040403948 which is filed under Section 34 Revenue Code, 2006 (Sonkali Vs. Baran) which is pending since 10.10.2022,within a stipulated time as possible in the interest of justice as contained in Annexure no. 1 within specific stipulated period. "

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the mutation case of the petitioner under Section 34 of the Act, 2006 was decided on 05.04.2023. Against thereto, respondent no. 3 has filed a recall application on 11.10.2023 for recalling the order dated 05.04.2023. Against the said recall application, petitioner has filed her objections on 03.11.2023 and the same has yet not been decided whereas around 6 months have been passed.

On being specifically asked from learned counsel for the petitioner that whether petitioner has preferred any urgency application for early disposal of the objections against the recall application by showing urgency in the matter before the Court concerned, it has been replied by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such application has been preferred before the Court concerned and petitioner has approached this Court directly for deciding the case expeditiously.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that present petition may be disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of the objections against the recall application before the Court concerned and if any such application is preferred by the petitioner the same may be decided within the stipulated time by this Court may fix.

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the prayer made

by learned counsel for the petitioner.

On the request of learned counsel for the petitioner and without entering into the merit of the case, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of the objections against the recall application in mutation case Computerized No. T202204040403948 filed under Section 34 Revenue Code, 2006 (Sonkali Vs. Baran), which is pending since 03.11.2023 before respondent no. 2. If any such urgency application is preferred, it is expected that respondent no. 2 shall decide the urgency application expeditiously in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without providing any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

Order Date :- 2.5.2024 Ashish

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench