Disposed

Budhram @ Budhau v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy., Home Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC24 May 2024/539/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Court disposed of the matter without deciding merits. It granted liberty to the petitioner to file an application for early disposal of a pending evidence application. The respondent was directed to decide such application expeditiously with hearing if filed.

What did the court decide?

The petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move a disposal application for early disposal of the application dated 20.01.2022. Respondent no. 3 is directed to decide it expeditiousl

Budhram @ Budhau Vs State of U.P Thru… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39417

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 539 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Budhram @ Budhau Respondent :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy., Home Deptt., Lucknow And Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd.Yusuf Ansari,Rushida Farheen Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶7

Heard.

¶8

Present petition has been preferred for quashing of the impugned revisional order dated 03.04.2024 passed by the respondent no. 2-Board of Revenue, Lucknow and with a further prayer to direct the respondent no. 3 to take a decision on the application of the petitioner dated 20.01.2022 for filing the evidence.

¶9

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the application was preferred by the petitioner on 20.01.2022 for filing the evidence on which no orders have been passed so far by the respondent no. 3 and fix the case for hearing on written as well as oral arguments, which are available on record. Against the said order, the petitioner had preferred a revision under Section 219 of Land Revenue Act, 1901 which was dismissed by the revisional Court on the ground that the revision is not maintainable.

¶10

On the other hand, learned Standing counsel has submitted that the application preferred by the petitioner has not been rejected by the Tehsildar and the revision against the said order has rightly been rejected by the revisional Court as the same was not maintainable under Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act, 1901.

¶11

At the stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent that a direction may be issued to the respondent no. 3 to pass an order on the application of the petitioner dated 20.01.2022 for filing the evidence within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶12

On being specifically asked from learned counsel for the petitioner that whether petitioner has preferred any disposal application for early disposal of the application dated 20.01.2022 for filing the evidence 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 application 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 a disposal application for early disposal of the application dated 20.01.2022 for filing the evidence before the Court concerned and if any such

¶14

application is preferred by the petitioner the same may be decided by the respondent no. 3 within the stipulated time by this Court may fix.

¶15

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

¶16

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 the disposal application for early disposal of the application dated 20.01.2022 for filing the evidence before respondent no. 3. If any such disposal application is preferred, it is expected that respondent no. 3 shall decide the said disposal 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.

¶17

Order Date :- 24.5.2024

¶18

Ashish

¶19

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

Budhram @ Budhau v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy., Home Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Budhram @ Budhau v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy., Home Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Samujh and Others. Vs Smt.Chandra Pali and Others.

Ram Surat and Others Vs Assistant Director of Consolidation Sultanpur and Another

Munder Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and Ohters

Anoop Mishra Alias Anoop Kumar Vs Learned Additional Commissioner 2ND Lko. Division Lko. and Others

Ram Charan Vs Additional Commissioner (Administration), Ayodhya Division and 2 Others

Smt. Janka Vs Court of Sub Divisional Magistrate Tehsil Distt. Unnao and Others