Disposed

Smt Gaytri Devi v. State of Up and 4 Others

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2024WRIC/21615/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-bench writ petition sought a direction to decide a pending mutation case within a stipulated period. The High Court, noting the statutory mandate for time-bound disposal, directed the respondent Tahsildar to conclude the case expeditiously within three months on merit after hearing parties, dispensing with the service of notice.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Naib Tehsildar to decide the pending Case No. 5942/2022 expeditiously within three months on merit after hearing parties.

Smt Gaytri Devi vs State of Up and 4… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:111825

¶2

Court No. - 34

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21615 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt Gaytri Devi Respondent :- State Of Up And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Prakash Misra,Prakash Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Bharti

¶5

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Chandra Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Awadhesh Kumar Patel, learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents no.1 & 2 and perused the record.

¶7

The present writ petition has been filed, inter alia , for the following relief:

¶8

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.2,Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil-Hata, District Kushinagar, to decide the Case No. 5942/2022 (old Case No.1374/2022), ,Computerized Case No. T202205440205942 (Smt. Asha Devi vs. Rajkumar and others), under Section 35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, within stipulated period as directed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶9

(ii) .....................

¶10

(iii) ...................."

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case under Section 35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending for disposal since 2022 before the respondent No.2 but till date the proceeding has not been concluded.

¶12

Sub Rule 7 of Rule 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 provides as under:

¶13

"............(7). The Tahsildar shall make an endeavour to decide the undisputed case of mutation within the period of 45 days from the date of the registration of the case and the disputed case of mutation within the period of 90 days and if the proceeding is not concluded within such period the reason for the same shall be recorded."

¶14

There is a clear legislative mandate that if proceedings are not concluded within stipulated period of time as provided under the aforesaid provision, reasons for the same shall be recorded.

¶15

Learned Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection to the extent that a direction is issued by this Court for expeditious disposal of the case within stipulated period as to be fixed by this Court.

¶16

In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, the service of notice upon the respondent nos.4 & 5 is dispensed with.

¶17

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this writ petition pending.

¶18

Accordingly, without adverting on merits of the case and with the consent of the parties, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Hata, District Kushinagar (respondent No. 2), before whom the aforementioned matter is pending for disposal, to decide the Case No. 5942/2022 (Old Case No.1374/2022) (Computerized Case No. T202205440205942), strictly in accordance with law, by a reasoned and speaking order on merit after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, unless there is

¶19

any legal impediment. It is further directed that no unnecessary adjournments be granted to either of the parties and the adjournment, if prayed for, will be permissible to be granted only in exceptional circumstances.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 9.7.2024 Abhishek Gupta

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Gaytri Devi v. State of Up and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Gaytri Devi v. State of Up and 4 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

Nishi Mishra vs the Vice Chancellor of the Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar University and Another

Neeraj Kumar vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Raunak Mishra vs Banaras Hindu University and 3 Others

Rammurat vs State of Up and 3 Others

Shiv Gulam vs State of Up and Another

Kamleshwar vs State of Up and 9 Others