Disposed

Ramdayal Kushwaha and Another v. State of Up and 10 Others

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2024WRIC/21143/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court exercised writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to direct the Sub-Divisional Officer, Tehsil Bhatpar Rani, District Deoria, to decide a pending application under Section 134 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, within a stipulated period.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Sub-Divisional Officer to decide the pending application under Section 134 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, expeditiously after issuing notices and affording hearing.

Ramdayal Kushwaha and Another vs State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:120240

¶2

Court No. - 49

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21143 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Ramdayal Kushwaha And Another Respondent :- State Of Up And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Bharti

¶5

Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha and perused the record.

¶7

The petitioners have invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, with the following prayer:-

¶8

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding to the respondent no.2 i.e. Sub-Divisional Officer, TehsilBhatpar Rani, District Deoria to decide the case bearing Case No.T202405200501419 (Ramdayal Vs. Bhola and others), under Section 134 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, pending in the court of respondent no.2, Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Bhatpar Rani, District Deoria since 09.05.2023, within stipulated period fix by this Hon'ble Court."

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have moved an application under Section 134 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which is pending consideration since 09.05.2023. But till date neither any notice has been issued to the other side nor any fruitful steps have been taken to decide the said application.

¶10

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection in case a direction is issued for early disposal of the aforementioned matter.

¶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 present writ petition, with a direction that Sub Divisional Officer, Deoria (respondent No.2) shall consider the said application as mentioned above and immediately issue notices to the other side and decide the same, in accordance with law, expeditiously as early as possible.

¶12

It is expected that it should be decided by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, 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 :- 26.7.2024 Mini

¶15

Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramdayal Kushwaha and Another v. State of Up and 10 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramdayal Kushwaha and Another v. State of Up and 10 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

Yasin Khan vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Mihi Lal vs State of U.P. and 15 Others

Harnandan vs Settlement Officer Consolidation and 31 Others

Ramjas vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 2 Others

Bachchu Ram and Another vs Additional Director of Consolidation and 5 Others

Ram Sajeevan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others