Allowed

Ram Sharan v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. 8 Others

Allahabad HC31 May 2024/2731/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Article 227 writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction for the early disposal of a land mutation case pending for over 19 years. Without examining merits, the Court disposed of the petition granting liberty to file an urgency application in the lower court.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of the pending case.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:41503

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2731 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Ram Sharan Respondent :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Ram Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present petition has been preferred for issuing a direction to the respondent no. 2-Tehsildar, Tehsil Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar to decide the Computerized Case No. T2007044331 (Ram Sharan and others Vs. Vinod Kumar and others) under Section 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901, which is pending since 28.07.2004 and mostly general dates were given in the case and the copy of the order sheet has been filed alongwith the present petition.

¶8

It is further submitted that the petitioner is waiting for getting justice from last 20 years in mutation case which as per new enactment i.e. U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is to be decided within a period of 45 days, if it is undisputed and in the case of dispute, the same is to be decided within 90 days although the said enactment is not applicable in the case of the petitioner as the case of the petitioner was filed under Section 34 of the Act, 1901 where no time limit is prescribed.

¶9

On being specifically asked from learned counsel for the petitioner that what is the stage in the case, it has been replied by learned counsel for the petitioner that it is also not clear from

¶10

the order sheet as in several dates, it has been shown as ससाቌኚय कक

¶11

ललिए i.e. for evidence.

¶12

On being further 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.

¶13

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 mutation case 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.

¶14

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

¶15

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 aforesaid case, which is pending since 28.07.2004 before court concerned. If any such urgency application is preferred, it is expected that Court concerned shall decide the urgency application expeditiously keeping in mind that the case is pending from last more than 19 years, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without providing any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶16

Order Date :- 31.5.2024 Ashish

¶17

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

Ram Sharan v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sharan v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. 8 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. Sarla Devi Mishra @ Sarla Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. for Revenue Lko. and 4 Others

Dinesh Kumar Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. Lko. and 46 Others

Sarvjeet Singh and Others Vs State of the U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

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

Mohd. Irshad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 8 Others

Mangal Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Gonda and Others