Disposed¶10

Gauri Shankar Mishra and Another v. State of U.P. and 11 Others

Allahabad HC1 Jul 2025WRIC/20425/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Expeditious disposal of revenue court case; time-bound direction to Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Gorakhpur; partition suit under section 116/144, Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code 2006; mandamus; admission-stage disposal without counter affidavit; no notice to private respondents; six-month timeline from production of certified copy; no adjudication on merits; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:101400; WRIT - C No. 20425 of 2025; order dated 1.7.2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No. 2 (Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Gorakhpur) to decide Case No.38263/2024, computerized case No. T202405310338263, under section 116/144, Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code 2006, in accordance with law after hearing all affected parties, preferably within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order. ¶10

Gauri Shankar Mishra and Another vs State of U.P. and 11 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶10

Issue for consideration

Whether, by way of mandamus, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Gorakhpur (respondent No. 2) should be directed to decide the pending partition suit Case No.38263/2024 (computerized case No. T202405310338263) under section 116/144, Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code 2006 within a specific/stipulated period.

¶7

Court's answer

As no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending or issuing notice to the private respondents, the writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage without calling for counter affidavit.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

Respondent No. 2 was directed to decide Case No.38263/2024, computerized case No. T202405310338263 (Gauri Shankar Mishra Versus Brij Bihari Mishra) under section 116/144, Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code 2006.

¶9

Key takeaways

The case is to be decided in accordance with law after hearing all affected parties, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order.ratio¶9
The Court made it clear that it has not adjudicated the case on merit.obiter¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (WRIT - C No. 20425 of 2025, Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:101400), High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J., order dated 1.7.2025: Petitioners sought a mandamus for expeditious disposal of partition suit Case No.38263/2024 (computerized case No. T202405310338263, Gauri Shankar Mishra Versus Brij Bihari Mishra) under section 116/144, Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code 2006, pending before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Gorakhpur (respondent No. 2). Holding that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending or issuing notice to the private respondents, the Court disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage without calling for counter affidavit, directing respondent No. 2 to decide the case in accordance with law after hearing all affected parties, preferably within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order. The Court expressly clarified that it had not adjudicated the case on merit.

Gauri Shankar Mishra and Another v. State of U.P. and 11 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gauri Shankar Mishra and Another v. State of U.P. and 11 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chameli Devi vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Smt. Geeta Devi vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 5 Others

Bahau Yadav vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Hariram and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Mangal Vishwakarma vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dudhnath vs State of U.P. and 7 Others