Karmaita Vs Nayab Tehsildar Bhadainya Tehsil Lambhua Distt. Sultanpur and Another

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:40171

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2610 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Karmaita

¶5

Respondent :- Nayab Tehsildar Bhadainya Tehsil Lambhua Distt. Sultanpur And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Vivekanand Misra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶7

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

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present petition has been preferred for issuing direction to the respondent no.1/Nayab Tehsildar Bhadainya Tehsil Lambhua Distt. Sultanpur to decide the mutation case No. 4170 of 2022 (computerized case no. T-202204680304170) titled as 'Karmaita vs. Shivpati" filed under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which is pending since 08.09.2022 whereas as per Rule 34(7) of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, the application filed under Section 34 of the Code, 2006, if undisputed, it is to be decided within a period of 45 days and if there is any dispute, then the same shall be decided within a period of 90 days.

¶9

It is further submitted that the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 34 of the Code, 2006 is disputed by the private respondents as such, the same is to be decided within a period of 90 days from the day of submission of the application, whereas near about one year and eight months have passed but the matter is still pending.

¶10

On being specifically asked from learned counsel for the petitioner that whether petitioner has preferred any urgency application for early disposal of the proceedings pending under Section 34 of the Code, 2006 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 mutation case pending under Section 34 of the Code, 2006 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 by this Court may fix.

¶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 in mutation case No. 4170 of 2022 (computerized case no. T-202204680304170) titled as 'Karmaita vs. Shivpati" filed under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which is pending since 08.09.2022 before respondent no. 1. If any such urgency application is preferred, it is expected that respondent no. 1 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.

¶15

Order Date :- 27.5.2024 Ashish

¶16

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

Karmaita v. Nayab Tehsildar Bhadainya Tehsil Lambhua Distt. Sultanpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karmaita v. Nayab Tehsildar Bhadainya Tehsil Lambhua Distt. Sultanpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue and 6 Others

Ram Sumer Vs Addl. Commissioner Faizabad Mandal Faizabad Now Ayodhya and Others

Shrimati Maryam @ Arshi Vs Board of Revenue U.P. Thru. Chairman Lko. and 3 Others

Kashi Ram Vs D.D.C. and Ors.

Ramu (Died) and Others Vs Addl. Commissioner, Judicial, 2ND, Lko. Division Lko. and 3 Others

Manju Agrahari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 2 Others