Santosh Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. and Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Santosh Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. and Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the pending recall application dated 17.03.2021 in Mutation Case No.T202004040103216 most expeditiously, affording full opportunity of hearing without unnecessary adjournments, conditional upon the petitioner furnishing the undertaking referred to in the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should direct respondent No.2 to consider and decide the petitioner's pending recall application dated 17.03.2021 filed in Mutation Case No.T202004040103216 (under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006) expeditiously.

Court's answer

Ends of justice are served by directing respondent No.2 to consider and decide the pending recall application dated 17.03.2021 filed in Mutation Case No.T202004040103216 most expeditiously, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either party.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner must furnish an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments and to cooperate in early disposal; if he does not furnish it, he shall not be entitled to the benefit of this order.

Key takeaways

The Court has not examined the case of either party on merits; respondent No.2 shall decide the mutation case strictly in accordance with law.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Jaspreet Singh, J.; Neutral Citation No. 2025:AHC-LKO:11701; decided 25.2.2025) disposed of a Matters Under Article 227 petition (No. 1057 of 2025) by Santosh Pal seeking expeditious disposal of his recall application dated 17.03.2021 filed in Mutation Case No.T202004040103216 under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, pending before respondent No.2. Delays were attributed partly to the Members of the Bar abstaining from judicial work pursuant to a resolution. The Court directed respondent No.2 to consider and decide the pending recall application most expeditiously, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either party, and required the petitioner to furnish an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments and to cooperate in early disposal, failing which he would not be entitled to the benefit of the order. The Court expressly clarified that it had not examined the case of either party on merits and that respondent No.2 shall decide the mutation case strictly in accordance with law.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11701

Court No. - 8

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1057 of 2025

Petitioner :- Santosh Pal

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Haider Abbas Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

Heard.

In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent No.3 is dispensed with.

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of his recall application dated 17.03.2021 filed in Mutation Case No.T202004040103216, under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 pending before the respondent No.2.

It is submitted that though a large number of dates have been fixed, however, for the reasons beyond control, the aforesaid mutation case has not yet been decided.

Learned standing counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the extract of the order-sheet and has pointed out that in majority of the dates, the proceedings before the respondent No.2 could not advance on account of the resolution passed by the Members of the Bar abstaining from judicial work.

At this stage, it is submitted that the petitioner is ready to furnish an undertaking to the effect that the petitioner will not seek any unnecessary adjournment and shall also cooperate in the early disposal of the aforesaid case.

Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending rather ends of justice can be served by directing the respondent No.2 to consider and decide the pending recall application dated 17.03.2021 filed in Mutation Case No.T202004040103216 most expeditiously, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably as expeditiously as possible.

The petitioner shall also furnish an undertaking, as mentioned above, along with a copy of this order. In case, if the petitioner does not furnish the aforesaid undertaking, then the petitioner shall not be entitled to the benefit of this order.

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the respondent No.2 shall decide the mutation case of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of . Order Date :- 25.2.2025 Rakesh/-

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench