Disposed

Prem Chandra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 10 Others

Allahabad HC6 May 2024/2247/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 227, the petitioner sought direction to the Sub Divisional Magistrate for expeditious disposal of a pending appeal regarding a land dispute involving agricultural crops and an interim order status quo. The court disposed of the petition without deciding the merits, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the lower court for an urgency application.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with liberty to move an urgency application for early disposal of the pending appeal before the Sub Divisional Magistrate.

Prem Chandra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:34748

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2247 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Prem Chandra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Indrapal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present writ petition has been filed for issuing direction to the respondent no. 2/Sub Divisional Magistrate, TehsilSarojini Nagar, District Lucknow to decide the application dated 24.04.2024 preferred by the petitioner in appeal no. 2718/2024 filed by respondents in the present writ petition titled as 'Om Prakash and Ors. vs. Prem Chandra', expeditiously within a stipulated time as this Hon'ble Court may fix and with a further prayer to restrain the respondents from cutting the Rabi crop standing on the land in question.

¶8

It is further submitted that an appeal was preferred under Section 34(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 against the order dated 04.01.2024 passed by the Tehsildar in favour of the petitioner. Initially, an order of status quo was passed by the respondent no. 2 on 31.01.2024 till the next date of listing that was 15.02.2024. Since 15.02.2024, several dates were fixed but the interim order granted on 31.01.2024 was not extended but the private respondents in the present writ petition who were appellants, they are restraining the petitioner to harvest the standing crop of the petitioner.

¶9

Under these compelling circumstances, the petitioner has filed an application on 24.04.2024 before the respondent no. 2 but till date no orders have been passed on the same.

¶10

On being specifically asked from learned counsel for the petitioner that whether the petitioner has preferred any application for early disposal of the case 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.

¶11

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that present petition may be disposed of with a

¶12

liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of the case before the Court concerned and if any such application is preferred by the petitioner the same may be decided by the respondent no. 1 within the stipulated time fix by this Court.

¶13

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

¶14

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 application dated 24.04.2024 preferred by the petitioner in appeal no. 2718/2024 which has been filed by respondents in the present writ petition titled as 'Om Prakash and Ors. vs. Prem Chandra', which is pending before respondent no. 2. If any such application is preferred, it is expected that respondent no. 2 shall decide the urgency application preferred by the petitioner 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.

¶15

Order Date :- 6.5.2024 Nitesh

¶16

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

Prem Chandra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 10 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Chandra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 10 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. Dile Rani Devi and Others Vs Commissioner Faizabad Division Faizabad and Others

Vijay Kumar Singh and Others Vs Addl. Commissioner (Admn), Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya and Others

Chhotelal @ Chhotan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Jagdish and Another Vs Deputy Director Consolidation Sitapur

Shiva Prasad Vs D.D.C. Kheri and Others

Mohammad Afjal and 4 Others Vs Board of Revenue,U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman and 3 Others