Disposed

Smt. Upma Singh v. Nayab Tehsildar Amaniganj, Tehsil Milkipur, Ayodhya and Others

Allahabad HC13 Jan 2025/94/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking a direction to the Nayab Tehsildar to decide a pending Section 34 U.P. Revenue Code mutation case of 2024 expeditiously. The court disposed of the petition directing disposal within three months by reasoned order after hearing parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Nayab Tehsildar Amaniganj to decide Case No. 1313/2024 under Section 34 U.P. Revenue Code within three months by reasoned order after hearing.

Smt. Upma Singh Vs Nayab Tehsildar Amaniganj, Tehsil… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2140

¶2

Court No. - 20

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 94 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Upma Singh Respondent :- Nayab Tehsildar Amaniganj, Tehsil Milkipur, Ayodhya And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Divyanshu Singh,Divya Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Divyanshu Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent no.1 and perused the record.

¶7

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

¶8

"(i) Issue a direction to the opposite party no.1 i.e. Nayab Tehsildar Amaniganj, Tehsil- Milkipur, District- Ayodhya to decide the pending case no. 1313/2024 (Comuterized Case No. T2024042304011313) under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, filed by the petitioner expeditiously within stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case under Section 34 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending for disposal since 2024 before the respondent No.1 but till date the proceeding has not been concluded. He further submits that parties have already appeared in the matter and have sought time for filing objection in the month of April, 2024 but till date no objections have been filed.

¶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.2 & 3 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 Nayab Tehsildar Amaniganj, Tehsil Milkipur, District Ayodhya (respondent No.1), before whom the aforementioned matter is pending for disposal, to decide the Case No. 1313 of 2024 (Computerized Case No. T2024042304011313), 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 any legal impediment. It is further directed that no unnecessary adjournments be granted to either of the parties

¶19

and the adjournment, if prayed for, will be permissible to be granted only in exceptional circumstances.

¶20

In case the lawyers do not co-operate with the proceedings either on account of abstainment from work or otherwise, the court concerned shall permit personal appearance of the parties to address it on the merits of the aforesaid case.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 13.1.2025 Abhishek Gupta

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SUMAIRA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Upma Singh v. Nayab Tehsildar Amaniganj, Tehsil Milkipur, Ayodhya and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Upma Singh v. Nayab Tehsildar Amaniganj, Tehsil Milkipur, Ayodhya and 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Swastik Multitrade Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Authorized Signatory Prabhat Ojha vs Ananya Pandey

Hawelia Builders Pvt. Ltd. Gautam Budh Nagar Thru. Its Director vs Anupam Srivastava and Another

Azad Ali and Others vs Suresh and Others

Naved and Others vs Board of Revenue Thru. President U.P. Lko. and Another

Ramdheeraj Thru. His Wife Renu Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and 18 Others

Prabhawati vs Ld. Court of Tehsildar Judicial, Tehsil Bikapur, Ayodhya and Another