Disposed

Sudhiraj Singh and 3 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2024WRIC/26287/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought directions to the Tehsildar, Sadar, Gorakhpur to decide a pending restoration application under Section 34/35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within the time prescribed by Section 34(7). The High Court disposed of the writ petition directing the Tehsildar to decide the case per that provision unless legally impeded.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with direction to Tehsildar, Sadar, Gorakhpur to decide Case No.441 as per Section 34(7), U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

Sudhiraj Singh and 3 Others vs State of Up and 3 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:144528

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 26287 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Sudhiraj Singh And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

¶7

In view of the order proposed to be passed herein, no useful purpose would be served by putting the opposite party to notice and keeping this petition pending before this Court. However, in case the opposite party feels aggrieved by the order his/her right to seek modification/variation of the order is being kept reserved.

¶8

The basic relief sought by the petitioner in the present writ petition is to direct the Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District Gorakhpur to decide the restoration application which is pending in Case No.441 (Sudama vs. Radhey Shayam and others) Computerized Case No. T202405310312962 under Section 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, within stipulated period.

¶9

It is argued by the counsel for the petitioner that as per provisions contained under sub-section (7) of Rules 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, such kind of applications should be decided within a time bound period. Sub section (7) of Section 34 reads as follows:-

¶10

"(7). The Tahsildar shall make an endeavor to decide 20 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."

¶11

It is further argued that though the aforesaid period has already been lapsed but till date no final decision has been taken in the matter, hence the present writ petition.

¶12

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of finally directing the Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District Gorakhpur to decide the aforesaid case as per the provisions contained under sub-section (7) of Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, unless there is no legal impediment.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.9.2024 S.K.

¶14

Digitally signed by :- SWEETY KANOJIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sudhiraj Singh and 3 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhiraj Singh and 3 Others v. State of Up and 3 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

Chitra Singh vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Priyanka Agrawal vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kranti vs President Public Service Commission Up Prayagraj and Another

Pankaj Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Anita Rani vs State of Up and 4 Others

Ganesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others