Disposed

Ramanand v. State of U.P. Thru. Colector/ District Magistrate, Amethi and Others

Allahabad HC9 Aug 2024A227/3423/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge granted an order for the expeditious disposal of a pending revision petition by the respondent no. 2, directing them to decide the matter on merits after hearing parties but without unnecessary adjournments, dispensing with notice to private respondents.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the pending revision on merits expeditiously after hearing parties.

Ramanand vs State of U.P. Thru. Colector/… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:55093

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3423 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Ramanand Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Colector/ District Magistrate, Amethi And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rama Pati Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Heard Shri R. P. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing at some length, submits that he does not wish to press his relief no.1 and the petition may be considered only for the relief no.2 which reads as under:-

¶8

"(ii) Issue order or direction whereby directing the opposite party no.2 to decide the Revision (No.1376 of 2024 Computerized Case No.C201404000001376, Ramanand Vs. Guddu & others) on the merits after hearing the parties in accordance with law within the time as stipulated by this Hon'ble Court."

¶9

Having considered the aforesaid and since the relief has been confined only for expeditious disposal of the revision which is pending before the respondent no.2.

¶10

Accordingly, the learned Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection in case if the expedite order is passed.

¶11

In view thereof, notice to the private respondents no.3 to 5 is dispensed with.

¶12

The petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no.2 to consider and decide the pending revision of the petitioner on merits as expeditiously as possible after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties but without

¶13

granting any unnecessary adjournments.

¶14

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the revisional court shall decide the same strictly in accordance with law.

¶15

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 9.8.2024 ank

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ramanand v. State of U.P. Thru. Colector/ District Magistrate, Amethi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramanand v. State of U.P. Thru. Colector/ District Magistrate, Amethi 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

Vijay Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Dhirendra Singh Vs Additional Commissioner Judicial Iind, Lucknow Division, Lucknow and Another

Madhurima Yadav Vs Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow Thru. Chairman and Another

Rohtas Presidential Towers Residents Welfare Association Thru President Sudhir Thakur and Anr. vs State of U.P. Thru Addl.Chief Secy. Finance Lko and Ors.

Piyari @ Ram Piyari vs Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya and Others

Ram Chandra Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others