Disposed

Safik Mohammad v. Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda and Others

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2024A227/5407/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 227, the petitioner sought direction to the respondent commission to decide a stay application filed in an associated revision. The court disposed of the petition without examining merits, granting liberty to move an urgency application for early disposal of the stay matter.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of the stay application; respondent directed to decide it expeditiously.

Safik Mohammad vs Commissioner Devi Patan… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:76845

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5407 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Safik Mohammad Respondent :- Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Mishra,Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶7

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Adnan Ahmad, Advocate on behalf of respondent no. 7 is taken on record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present writ petition has been preferred for issuing direction to the respondent no. 2 to decide the stay application filed by the petitioner in Revision No. R202408000001828 under Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 titled as 'Safik Mohammad vs. Hukumchand and Ors.' on the date fixed i.e. 26.11.2024 and till then, the parties may be directed to maintain status quo in the interest of justice.

¶9

It is further submitted that the respondents in the revision are raising construction due to which the nature of the property will change.

¶10

On being specifically asked from learned counsel for the petitioner that whether petitioner has preferred any application for early disposal of aforesaid stay application filed along with r the revision before the respondent no. 2 showing the urgency, it has been replied by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such application has been preferred before the Court concerned and petitioner has approached this Court directly for deciding the same expeditiously.

¶11

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that present petition may be disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of the stay application filed along with the revision before the Court concerned and if any such application is preferred by the petitioner the same may be decided within the stipulated time fixed by this Court.

¶12

On the request of learned counsel for the petitioner and without entering into the merit of the case, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an urgency application for early disposal of aforesaid stay application before the respondent no. 2. If any such application is preferred, it is expected that the respondent

¶13

no. 2 shall decide the urgency application preferred by the petitioner expeditiously in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without providing any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶14

Order Date :- 21.11.2024 Nitesh

¶15

Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Safik Mohammad v. Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Safik Mohammad v. Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda 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

Dr. Ankit Gupta, Assistant Professer Vs Professor (Dr.) Arvind Rajvanshi Executive Director (E.D) Rae Bareli and 2 Others

Dinesh Chandra Vs Board of Revenue, Lucknow Thru. Member and 19 Others

Rekha Devi Vs Nayab Tehsildar Babaganj Tehsil Kunda District Pratapgarh and Another

Kaushlendra Pratap Srivastava Vs Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, Milk Commissioner, Dairy Development Lko. and Another

Khursheed Alam Vs Learned Court of Tehsildar, Tehsil Kunda, Pratapgarh and Others

Vimla Vs Addl. Commissioner Consolidation, Lucknow and Others