Disposed

Manoj Kumar Singh v. State of Up and 21 Others

Allahabad HC2 Jul 2024WRIB/2170/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition seeking a direction to respondent no. 2 to decide a pending appeal initiated under the U.P. Co-operative Housing Societies Act. The court directed the Settlement Consolidation Officer to finalize the case within six months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Settlement Consolidation Officer (Respondent no. 2) to decide the pending appeal case no. 1019/1517/T.B. strictly in accordance with law expeditiously within six months.

Manoj Kumar Singh vs State of Up and 21 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:106976

¶2

Court No. - 49

¶3

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2170 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of Up And 21 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bachcha Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the records.

¶7

Instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia , for the following prayer:

¶8

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent no.2 to decide the case no. 1019/1517/T.B. under section 11 (1) U.P.C.H. Act (Manoj Kumar and others Versus Raj Dev and others), which is pending before him within the stipulated period fix by this Hon'ble Court so that justice may be done. "

¶9

It is submitted that having been aggrieved with the order dated 15.03.1995 passed under Section 9A(2) of U.P.C.H. Act, present petitioner along with other persons have preferred appeal which is pending consideration since 12.05.2016 despite the fact that opposite party in appeal has already appeared and case is ready for final adjudication.

¶10

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection, if a direction is issued to respondent no. 2 to decide the aforesaid case, expeditiously.

¶11

In this conspectus as above, no useful purpose would be served to keep this matter pending. Therefore, this court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition, without making any observation on the merits of the case, as mentioned in the writ petition, with a direction to respondent no.2 (Settlement Consolidation Officer) to decide the aforesaid case strictly in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶12

It is expected that it should be decided by a reasoned and speaking order, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

¶13

With the aforesaid direction, present writ petition is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 2.7.2024 Sumit K.

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SUMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Manoj Kumar Singh v. State of Up and 21 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Singh v. State of Up and 21 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

Similar cases

Jai Prakash and Another Vs D.D.C Jaunpur and 6 Others

Abhijit Malik @ Sonu vs State of U.P. and 9 Others

Ajay Pal Singh and Another vs Board of Revenue and 2 Others

Ved Pal vs State of Up and 4 Others

Smt Varsha Saini vs State of Up and 5 Others

Arun Kumar vs State of Up and 6 Others