Bechan and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

Bechan and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 to consider and decide the pending application for interim relief, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, without granting any unnecessary adjournment, preferably on the next date and in any event within four weeks thereafter; merits left unexamined and the court concerned to decide strictly in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should secure expeditious consideration and decision of the petitioners' pending application for temporary injunction/interim relief before respondent No.3, without entering into the merits of the case.

Court's answer

Ends of justice would be met by directing respondent No.3 to consider and decide the pending application for interim relief, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties.

Ratio / Principle

The decision of the interim-relief application was to be made without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either party, preferably on the next date and, if not possible, within four weeks thereafter.

Key takeaways

The Court expressly made clear that it had not examined the case of either of the parties on merits.obiter¶16
The court concerned shall consider and decide the case of the petitioners strictly in accordance with law.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 8), Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh, J.; Matters Under Article 227 No. 1073 of 2025; order dated 27.2.2025. Petitioners (Bechan and others) approached the Court seeking expeditious decision of their pending application for temporary injunction lying before respondent No.3, in a proceeding under Section 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 which, after an initial decision and an appeal, stood remanded. Without entering into the merits, the Court disposed of the petition, directing respondent No.3 to consider and decide the pending interim-relief application affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties but without granting any unnecessary adjournment, preferably on the next date and, if not possible, within four weeks thereafter. The Court clarified it had not examined the case of either party on merits and that the court concerned shall decide strictly in accordance with law.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11830

Court No. - 8

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1073 of 2025

Petitioner :- Bechan And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gyanendra Pathak,Adarsh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

Notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 3 has been accepted by the office of the Chief Standing Counsel.

Shri Pankaj Gupta, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no.4.

In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent Nos.5 to 8 is dispensed with.

By means of the instant petition, the petitioners have approached this Court with a limited prayer that their application for temporary injunction is engaging the attention of respondent no.3 which may be decided, expeditiously.

The record indicates that a proceedings were initiated under Section 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 which came to be decided against which an appeal has been preferred. After the appeal, the matter was remanded and in pursuance of the remand order, the matter is now engaging the attention of respondent no.3.

It is urged that the application for interim relief is pending and despite certain dates having been fixed, yet the same has not been considered and decided.

Learned standing counsel submits that he has no objection in case an expedite order is passed.

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, without entering into the merits of the case, the Court is of

the view that no gainful purpose would be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending rather ends of justice can be met by directing the respondent No.3 to consider and decide the pending application for interim relief, affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably on the next date and in case if the same is not possible, then within four weeks thereafter.

It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the Court concerned shall consider and decide the case of the petitioners strictly in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of .

Order Date :- 27.2.2025

Shukla

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench