Smt. Sangeeta vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Sangeeta vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No. 2 (Nayab Tehsildar Madhyavarti, Tehsil Soraon, district Prayagraj) to decide Case No. 2088/2023, Computerized Case No. T2023020303112088, under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, by a reasoned order on merit after hearing, expeditiously and preferably within three months from receipt of certified copy of the order; no unnecessary adjournments, adjournments only in exceptional circumstances.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition should be allowed by directing respondent No. 2 to decide the pending mutation Case No. 2088/2023 (under the U.P. Revenue Code) within a stipulated period.

Court's answer

Without adverting to the merits and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the Nayab Tehsildar Madhyavarti, Tehsil Soraon, district Prayagraj (respondent No. 2) to decide Case No. 2088/2023, Computerized Case No. T2023020303112088 (Sangeeta Maurya vs. Rajendra Kumar Maurya), under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, strictly in accordance with law, by a reasoned order on merit after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, expeditiously and preferably within three months from receipt of a certified copy of the order, unless there is any legal impediment; no unnecessary adjournments are to be granted to either party, and any adjournment may be granted only in exceptional circumstances.

Key takeaways

Under Sub Rule 7 of Rule 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, the Tahsildar is to endeavour to decide an undisputed mutation case within 45 days and a disputed mutation case within 90 days of registration, and if the proceeding is not concluded within such period, the reason for the same shall be recorded; the Court observed this as a clear legislative mandate.obiter¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, J.; Order Date 18.3.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:38352) disposed of WRIT - C No. 41133 of 2024 (Smt. Sangeeta v. State of U.P. and 2 Others) with the consent of parties and without adverting to merits, directing the Nayab Tehsildar Madhyavarti, Tehsil Soraon, district Prayagraj (respondent No. 2) to decide mutation Case No. 2088/2023, Computerized Case No. T2023020303112088 (Sangeeta Maurya vs. Rajendra Kumar Maurya), under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code — pending since 2023 — strictly in accordance with law, by a reasoned order on merit after affording opportunity of hearing, expeditiously and preferably within three months from receipt of a certified copy of the order, unless there is any legal impediment; no unnecessary adjournments to either party, adjournments only in exceptional circumstances. The Court noted Sub Rule 7 of Rule 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016: the Tahsildar is to endeavour to decide undisputed mutation cases within 45 days and disputed mutation cases within 90 days, recording reasons if proceedings exceed those periods.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38352

Court No. - 34

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 41133 of 2024

Petitioner :- Smt. Sangeeta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amar Nath Dwivedi,Dinesh Kumar Maurya Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Nand Lal Maurya, learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and perused the record.

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

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to decide the Case No. 2088/2023, Computerized Case No. T2023020303112088 (Sangeeta Maurya vs. Rajendra Kumar Maurya), under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, within stipulated period pending before him."

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case under Section 34 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending for disposal since 2023 before the respondent No.2.

Sub Rule 7 of Rule 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 provides as under:

"............(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…..."

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.

Learned Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection if a direction is issued by this Court for expeditious disposal of the case within stipulated period as to be fixed by this Court.

In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, the service of notice upon the respondent No. 3 is dispensed with.

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.

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 Madhyavarti Tehsil Soraon, district Prayagraj (respondent No. 2), before whom the aforementioned matter is pending for disposal, to decide the Case No. 2088/2023, Computerized Case No. T2023020303112088 (Sangeeta Maurya vs. Rajendra Kumar Maurya), under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, strictly in accordance with law, by a reasoned 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 will be granted to either of the parties and any adjournment, if prayed for, may be granted only in exceptional circumstances.

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

Order Date :- 18.3.2025

Sumaira

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