Ram Prasad Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gonda and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Ram Prasad Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gonda and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.1 to consider and finally decide Revision No. 1219/2022 (Computerized Case No. 202254083000001219) under Section 48 (1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 as expeditiously as possible, affording full opportunity of hearing and granting no unnecessary adjournments to either party, conditional upon the petitioner furnishing an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments and to cooperate in early disposal; no observation on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.1 should be directed to consider and finally decide Revision No. 1219/2022 (Computerized Case No. 202254083000001219) under Section 48 (1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, pending before him, expeditiously.

Court's answer

No gainful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending; ends of justice can be served by directing respondent No.1 to consider and finally decide the pending proceedings of Revision No. 1219/2022.

Ratio / Principle

The pending proceedings shall be decided as expeditiously as possible, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

Key takeaways

The petitioner shall furnish an undertaking (not to seek unnecessary adjournments and to cooperate in early disposal) along with a copy of the order; if the undertaking is not furnished, the petitioner shall not be entitled to the benefit of the order.ratio¶¶15
The Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits; the authority concerned shall consider and decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.ratio¶¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Jaspreet Singh, J.; order dated 6.12.2024) disposed of an Article 227 petition by Ram Prasad seeking expeditious disposal of Revision No. 1219/2022 (Computerized Case No. 202254083000001219) under Section 48 (1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, pending before respondent No.1, the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gonda. The Court noted that on majority of dates the proceedings could not advance owing to the Bar's resolution abstaining from judicial work, and that learned standing counsel had no objection to an expedite order. Held: respondent No.1 directed to consider and finally decide the pending revision as expeditiously as possible, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either party; the petitioner to furnish an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments and to cooperate in early disposal, failing which he would not be entitled to the benefit of the order; the Court expressly did not examine the case on merits and left the authority to decide strictly in accordance with law. Petition disposed of.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:81760

Court No. - 8

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5736 of 2024

Petitioner :- Ram Prasad Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Gonda And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Govind Kumar Chourasia Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

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

In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent No. 2 to 5 is dispensed with.

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of his Case bearing Revision No. 1219/2022 (Computerized Case No. 202254083000001219) filed under Section 48 (1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 pending before the respondent No.1.

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

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

Learned standing counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the extract of the order-sheet and has pointed out that in majority of the dates, the proceedings before the respondent No.1 could not advance on account of the resolution passed by the Members of the Bar abstaining from judicial work.

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.

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 finally decide

the pending proceedings of Case bearing Revision No. 1219/2022 (Computerized Case No. 202254083000001219) filed under Section 48 (1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 as expeditiously as possible, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

The petitioner shall also furnish an undertaking, as mentioned above, along with a copy of this order. In case, if the petitioner does not furnish the aforesaid undertaking, then the petitioner shall not be entitled to the benefit of this order.

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

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .

Order Date :- 6.12.2024 Asheesh

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