Sidhnath and Another Vs Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Patti, Pratapgarh and 6 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sidhnath and Another Vs Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Patti, Pratapgarh and 6 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent no.1 (SDM, Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh) to endeavour to decide the pending restoration application (filed 20.03.2024 by legal heirs of late Thakur Prasad in Suit No. 4985/2017) expeditiously, within four months from production of certified copy of the order, after hearing the parties in accordance with law if there is no legal impediment; parties directed to cooperate and avoid unnecessary adjournments.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent no.1, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh, should be directed to decide expeditiously the restoration application filed on 20.03.2024 by the legal heirs of late Thakur Prasad, pending in Suit No. 4985/2017.

Court's answer

Without entering into the merits, respondent no.1 (SDM, Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh) is desired to make all endeavour to decide the restoration application filed on 20.03.2024 by the legal heirs of late Thakur Prasad, pending in Suit No. 4985/2017 (Computerized No. T-201702570404985), expeditiously, within four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.

Ratio / Principle

The parties to the case are directed to cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and not to seek unnecessary adjournments; no such adjournment shall be granted by the Court concerned except in exceptional circumstances. Counsel for the petitioner undertakes to cooperate in expeditious disposal, failing which the benefit of this order shall not be available to the petitioner.

Key takeaways

In view of the order proposed to be passed, notice to the private respondents is dispensed with.ratio¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Matters under Article 227 No. 6422 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 5 — Sidhnath And Another v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Patti, Pratapgarh And 6 Others; decided November 4, 2025 by Hon'ble Alok Mathur, J. The petition prayed for a direction to respondent no.1 (SDM, Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh) to decide expeditiously the restoration application filed on 20.03.2024 by the legal heirs of late Thakur Prasad, pending in Suit No. 4985/2017 (Computerized No. T-201702570404985), 'Sidhnath and others Vs. Gram Sabha and others'. Without entering into the merits, the Court desired respondent no.1 to make all endeavour to decide the said restoration application expeditiously, within four months from production of a certified copy of the order, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment; further directed the parties to cooperate in expeditious disposal and to abstain from seeking unnecessary adjournments (none to be granted except in exceptional circumstances), with counsel for the petitioner undertaking cooperation, failing which the benefit of the order would not be available. Notice to the private respondents was dispensed with. Writ petition disposed of.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6422 of 2025

Sidhnath And Another

.....Petitioner(s) Versus

Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Patti, Pratapgarh And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vijay Kumar Mishra, Ashutosh Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta

Court No. - 5

HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent no.1 and Shri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for respondent no.2.

In view of the order proposed to be passed, notice to private respondents, is dispensed with.

Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for direction to the respondent No.1- i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh to decide expeditiously the restoration application, filed on 20.03.2024 by legal heirs of late Thakur Prasad, which is pending in the Suit No. 4985/2017 Computerized No. T-201702570404985, 'Sidhnath and others Vs. Gram Sabha and others, pending before him, in the interest of justice.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently met in case respondent no. 1 considers and decides the aforesaid case in the time bound manner.

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the aforesaid prayer.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits, respondent no.1 i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh is desired to make all endeavor to decide the restoration application, filed on 20.03.2024 by legal heirs of late Thakur

A227 No. 6422 of 2025

2

Prasad, which is pending in the Suit No. 4985/2017 Computerized No. T- 201702570404985, 'Sidhnath and others Vs. Gram Sabha and others, expeditiously, say within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.

It is further directed that the parties to the case shall cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment, neither any such adjournment shall be granted by the Court concerned, except in exceptional circumstances. Counsel for the petitioner undertakes that he shall cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case, failing which the benefit of this order shall not be available to the petitioner.

With above observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Alok Mathur,J.)

November 4, 2025

Muk

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench