Disposed

Jai Prakash Singh @ Jai Prakash and Another v. Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman and Others

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2024/3132/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 227, the petitioner sought expeditious disposal of a pending revision case. The High Court held that no gainful purpose would be served in keeping it pending. The Court directed the Respondent Board of Revenue to decide the revision case expeditiously, affording full hearing opportunities without unnecessary adjournments within six weeks, leaving merits to the c

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Respondent to consider and decide the pending Revision Case most expeditiously within six weeks, affording full opportunity of hearing to parties.

Jai Prakash Singh @ Jai Prakash and Another Vs Board… — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:46567

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3132 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Jai Prakash Singh @ Jai Prakash And Another Respondent :- Board Of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hari Kant,Ishwar Chandra Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 has been accepted by the office of the Chief Standing Counsel.

¶7

In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent Nos.2 to 5 is dispensed with.

¶8

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of Revision Case No.REV/1093/2022/Kushinagar, Computerized Case No.R20220544001093, under Section 333 of the U.P.Z.A.L.R. Act, District- Kushinagar (Jai Prakash and another Vs. Janardan Singh and others) pending before the respondent No.1.

¶9

It is submitted that though a large number of dates have been fixed, however, for the reasons beyond control, the case has not yet been decided.

¶10

Learned standing counsel submits that he has no objection in case an expedite order is passed.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending rather ends of justice can be served by directing the respondent No.1 to consider and decide the pending Revision Case No.REV/1093/2022/Kushinagar, Computerized Case No.R20220544001093, under Section 333 of the U.P.Z.A.L.R. Act, District- Kushinagar (Jai Prakash and another Vs. Janardan Singh and others) most expeditiously, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before the Court concerned.

¶12

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of

¶13

either of the parties on merits and the Court concerned shall consider and decide the case of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law.

¶14

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .

¶15

Order Date :- 9.7.2024 Ashutosh

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jai Prakash Singh @ Jai Prakash and Another v. Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Prakash Singh @ Jai Prakash and Another v. Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman and 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

Doober vs Addl. Commissioner Iii, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda and Others

Board of Trustees Shri Saraswati Jayanti Vidhyalaya Trust Thru. Mgr. Kaushal Prasad Shukla and Anr. vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Finance Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Dinesh Chandra Verma vs Sri Vinod Singh Rawat, Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Law and Justice, Lko. and Others

Shubham Singh @ Shibbu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Govind Prasad and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Civil Secrt. Lko. and 6 Others

Smt. Shakuntala Devi vs Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman and Others