Disposed

Amir Alam Khan v. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC18 Apr 2024A227/1879/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought correction of a typo in the prayer clause regarding the appeal section, requesting the respondent to decide an appeal within the statutory timeline. The court directed the respondent to decide the appeal expeditiously within six months without unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent to decide appeal No. 5922 of 2024 expeditiously within six months from receipt of certified copy of this order.

Amir Alam Khan vs Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:30474

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1879 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Amir Alam Khan Respondent :- Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Surendra Pratap Singh,Rajendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that due to some typographical mistake the Section under which appeal was filed has wrongly been transcribed as Section 34 whereas it is actually filed under Section 35 (2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 thus, Section 34 may be read as Section 35 (2) in the prayer clause of the petition.

¶7

As prayed, Section 34 wrongly mentioned in prayer clause of the petition shall be read, understood and applied in all manner as Section 35(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

¶8

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent that a direction may be issued to the respondent no. 1-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, District Lucknow to decide the appeal No. 5922 of 2024 Computerized Case No. T202410460205922 filed under Section 35 (2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 as per the mandate given in Section 183 (4) of the U.P. Land Revenue Code Rules, 2016 wherein it is provided that appeal shall be decided within a period of six months.

¶9

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

¶10

On the request of learned counsel for the petitioner and without entering into the merit of the case, it is expected that respondent no. 1 shall make endeavour to decide the appeal No. 5922 of 2024 Computerized Case No. T202410460205922 expeditiously, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, within a stipulated time as provided under the statute, from the date of production/receipt of certified copy of this order, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶11

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 18.4.2024 Ashish

¶13

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

Amir Alam Khan v. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amir Alam Khan v. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, Lucknow 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

Israji Vs Addl. Commissioner Administration Ayodhya Mandal Ayodhya and 4 Others

Ram Prakash and 3 Others Vs Ziladhikari Distt. Amethi and 8 Others

Sudha Tripathi @ Sudha Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Amir Alam Khan Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, Lucknow and Others

Smt. Gulab Kali Vs the Chairman, Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow and Others

Mansharam Vs Naib Tehsildar, Milkipur,, Tehsil Milkipur, Ayodhya and Others