Disposed

Jaiwanti v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Another

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2024A227/3170/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition under Article 227 sought expeditious disposal of a recall application under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, pending for an extended period. The High Court directed the respondent authority to decide the application within three months without unnecessary adjournment.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.1 to consider and decide the recall application within three months without unnecessary adjournment.

Jaiwanti vs State of U.P. Thru… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:47008

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3170 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Jaiwanti Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow And Another

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Ghanshyam Verma,Subhanshu Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶7

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

¶8

In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent No.2 is dispensed with.

¶9

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of recall application moved in Case bearing Computerized Case No.T201904230301243, under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 pending before the respondent No.1.

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

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 recall application in Computerized Case No.T201904230301243 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 three months from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before the Court concerned.

¶13

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the Court concerned shall consider and decide the recall application of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law.

¶14

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .

¶15

Order Date :- 11.7.2024 Rakesh/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jaiwanti v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaiwanti v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Another

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

Baliram Vs State of Up Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue and others

Rajesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 6 Others

Saif Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Poonam Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Panchayati Raj Lko. and 7 Others

Nidhi Lata vs Shri Pramod Nigam

Rooplal vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Hardoi, and 3 Others