The petitioner sought direction to expedite proceedings under Section 42-A of the U.P.C.H. Act and restrain dispossession of land. The respondent submitted that the application had been decided. The Court held that no cause of action survived and dismissed the petition as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:149773
Court No. - 49
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2610 of 2024 Petitioner :- Subhash Chand Respondent :- State Of Up And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- C.S.C.,Kshatresh Kumar
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
"1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner is taken on record. Office is directed to proceed accordingly.
"I. Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 3 to expedite the proceedings in Case No. 09R of 2016 (Subhash vs. State) filed under section 42-A of U.P.C.H. Act pending in the court of Consolidation Officer, Tehsil-Rampur, Maniharan, District- Saharanpur and decide the same within a stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
II. Issue a suitable Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not the dispossess the petitioner from land in dispute and not to alienate the same till disposal of aforesaid case."
Order Date :- 12.9.2024/ Rama Kant
Digitally signed by :- RAMAKANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives after the consolidated application under Section 42-A of the U.P.C.H. Act has been decided by the Consolidation Officer.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Subhash Chand
State Of Up And 4 Others
Dinesh Pathak
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
