Harnam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. U.P. and Others
Allahabad HC/2734/2024
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:41518 Court No. - 18 Case…
What the court decided
AI extract
No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:41518 Court No. - 18 Case…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:41518
Court No. - 18
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2734 of 2024
Petitioner :- Harnam Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shubham Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present petition has been preferred for issuing a direction to the respondent no. 2-Sub Divisional Magistrate (Judicial) Tehsil Nawabganj to decide Appeal No. T201804120115589 titled as Harilal and others Vs. Vasisth Chaudhary under Section 35 (2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which is pending since the year 2016, within the time as specified by this Court.
It is further submitted that Rule 183 (4) of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 stipulates a period of six months for deciding the appeal preferred under Section 35 (2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
It is further submitted that the petitioner is respondent/defendant no. 4 in the appeal, which was filed by the respondent no. 4 in the present petition.
On being asked from the learned counsel for the petitioner whether petitioner has preferred any urgency application for early disposal of the appeal, learned counsel for the petitioner has replied 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 appeal before the Court concerned and if any such application is preferred by the petitioner the same may be decided by the respondent no.2 within the stipulated time fix by this Court.
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 aforesaid Appeal, which is pending since the year 2016 before the 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 looking into the urgency mentioned therein 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 :- 31.5.2024 DiVYa
Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to direct the Sub Divisional Magistrate to decide a pending appeal within six months.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Harnam
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. U.P.
Harnam Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court