Disposed

Harishankar v. Sub Divisional Officer Kunda Distt. Pratapgarh and 11 Others

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2024A227/455/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition under Article 226 seeking direction to the Sub Divisional Officer to decide a pending partition suit expeditiously. The court directed the authority to dispose of the case within six months after hearing parties, without granting unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent to consider and decide the pending partition case expeditiously within six months without unnecessary adjournments.

Harishankar vs Sub Divisional Officer Kunda Distt. Pratapgarh and 11 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:9236

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 455 of 2024 Petitioner :- Harishankar Respondent :- Sub Divisional Officer Kunda Distt. Pratapgarh And 11 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ruchi Singh,Uma Shankar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

Heard Ms. Ruchi Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pankaj Gupta, learned Counsel for the Gaon Sabha and Sri Shashank Singh, learned State Counsel and perused the records.

¶6

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

¶7

The present petition has been filed for the following main relief:-

¶8

"Direct the Sub Divisional Officer, Kunda, District- Pratapgarh to consider and decide the Case No.T202002570104049, "Harishanker and others Versus Ghanshyam and others" under section-116 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 filed by petitioner and others pending before him since 03.09.2020 expeditiously within stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court as contained in Annexure No.1 to this petition."

¶9

It is stated that as per Rule 109(10) of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 , a suit for partition should be decided preferably within a period of six months, however, in the instant case, the case is pending since 2020 and on account of pendency of the aforesaid case(s), petitioner is suffering great hardship. In these circumstances, indulgence of this Court is required. Prayer is to direct the respondent no.1, to consider and decide the proceedings expeditiously.

¶10

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

¶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 to consider and decide the pending proceedings of Case No.T202002570104049, (Harishanker and others Versus Ghanshyam and others) most expeditiously, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably within a period of six months from the next date fixed before it, if possible and if there is no other legal impediment in this regard.

¶12

It is made clear that this 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.

¶13

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 1.2.2024 Jyoti/-

¶15

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

Harishankar v. Sub Divisional Officer Kunda Distt. Pratapgarh and 11 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harishankar v. Sub Divisional Officer Kunda Distt. Pratapgarh and 11 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

Akanksha Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and others

Shaban Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Shiv Prasad vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Manoj Kumar Saxena vs Shri Devesh Chaturvedi, Prin. Secy. Agriculture, U.P. Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Others

Gangadhar Tiwari vs Sub Divisional Magistrate Tehsil Patti Pratapgarh and 2 Others

Haneef and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another