Disposed

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

Allahabad HC30 May 2024/581/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition preferred for stay of an order dated 28.09.2022 of the Consolidation Officer. Court found petitioners filed no urgency application for interim stay. Petition disposed with liberty to approach lower courts for interim relief.

What did the court decide?

Disposed with liberty to petitioners to move urgency application in revision and appeal for early disposal of interim relief.

Dinesh Kumar Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:41019

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 581 of 2024 Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Singh And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue U.P. Lko. And 46 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajendra Prasad Sharma,Markandey Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers:-

¶7

"1. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the opposite party No. 2, 3 & 4 to stay the operation and implementation of the order dated 28.09.22/suspend the further proceeding in operation and implementation of order dated 28.9.22 of the learned Consolidation OfÏcer passed in Vaad No. 69 to 92 plus 132 State v. Prem Singh and Others till pendency of the Appeal pending adjudication before the Appellate Court Appeal No. 190 of 2022 Computerised No. 202254105800000251, Dinesh Kumar Singh & Others v. Munni Devi & Others.

¶8

2. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Opposite Party No. 2, 3 & 4 to stay the operation and implementation of the order dated 28.9.22/suspend the further proceeding in operation and implementation of order dated 28.9.22 of the Learned Consolidation OfÏcer passed in Vaad No. 69 to 92 plus 132 State v. Prem Singh & Others till pendency of the "Application for stay the operation and implementation of the order dated 28.9.22 of the Learned Consolidation OfÏcer passed in Vaad No. 69 to 92 plus 132 State v. Prem Singh & Others pending adjudication before the Learned Appellate Court in Appeal No. 190 of 2022 Computerized No. 202254105800000251, Dinesh Kumar Singh & Others v Munni Devi & Others".

¶9

3. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the opposite party No. 2, 3 & 4 to stay the operation and implementation of the order dated 28.09.22/suspend the further proceeding in operation and implementation of order dated 28.9.22 of the learned Consolidation OfÏcer passed in Vaad No. 69 to 92 plus 132 State v. Prem Singh and Others till pendency of the Revision No. 188/2021, 129/2022/82/2023, 67/2024 Dinesh Kumar Singh & Others v Indraj Singh & Others Computerized No. 20225410580001204 pending adjudication before the Learned D.D.C.

¶10

4. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction commanding and directing Opposite Party No. 2, 3, 4 to suspend further proceeding in operation and implementation of the impugned order dated 28.9.2022 of the Learned Consolidation OfÏcer passed in Vaad No. 69 to 92 plus 132 State v Prem Singh & Others till pendency of the instant writ petition."

¶11

The present writ petition has been preferred for stay of the operation of the order dated 28.09.2022 passed by the learned Consolidation OfÏcer during the pendency of the appeal and revision or pendency of the present writ petition.

¶12

On being asked from learned counsel for the petitioners whether the petitioners have filed any application for interim relief along with the appeal and the revision, learned counsel for the petitioners has replied that the interim relief application has been filed along with the appeal as well as the revision but it has not been enclosed with the present writ petition.

¶13

This Court further asked from learned counsel for the petitioners that whether the urgency application for disposal of the interim relief application, if any, filed by the petitioners, learned counsel for the petitioners has replied that the application has not been preferred but the request was always made before the court below.

¶14

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the present writ petition may be disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to move an urgency application before the respondent nos. 2 & 3 in the revision and appeal respectively for disposal of the interim relief application and if any such application is preferred by the petitioners, the same may be decided within a stipulated time as this Court may fix.

¶15

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

¶16

On the request of learned counsel for the petitioners and without entering into the merit of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to move an urgency application in the revision and appeal pending before the respondent nos. 2 & 3 respectively for early disposal of the interim relief application. If any such application is preferred by the petitioners, it is expected that respondent no. 2 & 3 shall decide the urgency application preferred by the petitioners 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 :- 30.5.2024 Nitesh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Smt. Bhagwan Dei Vs Additional Commissioner Judicial Lucknow and Ors.

Sarita Gautam Vs Naib Tehsildar, Thesil Purwa, Distt. Unnao and Others

Mansha Ram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and Others

Smt. Sarla Devi Mishra @ Sarla Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. for Revenue Lko. and 4 Others

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

Ram Feran Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Shravasti and 2 Others