Disposed

Mata Harsh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Sept 2024WRIB/2972/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition for a mandamus directing the Board of Revenue to decide a stay application filed in Second Appeal No. 2301 of 2022. The Court ordered expeditious disposal within one month and imposed a status quo pending the decision.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No. 2 to decide the stay application within one month to maintain status quo, without expressing opinion on merits.

Mata Harsh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:150940

¶2

Court No. - 50

¶3

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2972 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Mata Harsh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Pradeep Singh, learned counsel for the Village Panchayat concerned.

¶7

The limited prayer has been made by learned counsel for the petitioner in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the stay application filed in Second Appeal No. 2301 of 2022 (Computerized Case No. AL20221667002301), Mata Harsh Vs. State of U.P. and others, under Section 208 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

¶8

Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that appeal has been admitted but no order have been passed on the stay application. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Mool Chand Yadav Vs. Raza Buland Sugar Company Limited , reported in 1982, Volume (3) SCC 484 and the judgment in case of Ali Sher Vs. State of U.P. Through Collector reported in 2007 Volume 102 RD 498 , wherein the Apex Court as well as this Court has taken the view once the appeal or revision is admitted, then the appellate/ revisional court shall normally grant interim order as the orders impugned are of civil consequences.

¶9

Learned counsels appearing for the respondents have no objection to the aforesaid proposition.

¶10

Considering the totality of the circumstances and submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would stand sub served if directions are issued for expeditious disposal of stay application.

¶11

Accordingly, Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,

¶12

without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent No. 2, Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh, Prayagraj to consider and decide the aforementioned stay application, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided that there is no other legal impediment.

¶13

Till disposal of the stay application, the parties are directed to maintain status quo.

¶14

Order Date :- 17.9.2024 Anjali

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mata Harsh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mata Harsh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satya Narayan Gupta vs State of Up and 4 Others

Pramod Sachan vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Sarita Devi vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Girja Shankar Yadav vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Virendra Kumar vs State of U.P. and 14 Others

Narendra Bahadur Singh vs State of Up and 5 Others