Disposed

Sarwan Kumar v. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tahsil Ramsanehighat, Barabanki and Others

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2024A227/3672/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this matter under Article 227, the Allahabad High Court directed the Sub Divisional Magistrate to decide a pending recall application under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 expeditiously. The court directed the petitioner to provide an undertaking to avoid unnecessary adjournments and ensure cooperation for early disposal, noting the matter will be decided on merits by the authority, not the court.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to furnish an undertaking to not seek unnecessary adjournments and cooperate in early disposal. The respondent was directed to decide the pending recall application expedit

Sarwan Kumar vs Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tahsil… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:54092

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3672 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Sarwan Kumar Respondent :- Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tahsil Ramsanehighat, Barabanki And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Singh,Prashansa Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

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.

¶7

In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent Nos.2 to 6 is dispensed with.

¶8

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of his recall application dated 12.01.2024 in Case No.T202404120200046 (Sarwan Kumar vs Ram Singh and ors) filed under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 pending before the respondent No.1.

¶9

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

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to furnish an undertaking that the petitioner will not seek any unnecessary adjournment and shall also cooperate in the early disposal of the aforesaid case.

¶11

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/Sub Divisional Magistrate Ramsanehighat District Barabanki to consider and finally decide the pending recall application dated 12.01.2024 in Case No.T202404120200046 (Sarwan Kumar vs Ram Singh and ors) filed under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 as expeditiously as possible, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶12

The petitioner shall also furnish an undertaking, as mentioned above, along with a copy of this order. In case, if the petitioner

¶13

does not furnish the aforesaid undertaking, then the petitioner shall not be entitled to the benefit of this order.

¶14

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.

¶15

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .

¶16

Order Date :- 7.8.2024 Harshita

¶17

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

Sarwan Kumar v. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tahsil Ramsanehighat, Barabanki and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarwan Kumar v. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tahsil Ramsanehighat, Barabanki 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

Vishambhar Dayal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Dharm Dev Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Nadeem Akhtar Kidwai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lko. and 22 Others

M/S a Square, Thru. Its Proprietor Shri Ajay Pratap Singh and Another vs M/S Lucknow Producers Co-Operative Milk Union Limited, Lucknow and 3 Others

Abdul Hamid vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Another

Gudiya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others