Mahesh Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. and Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1802 of 2026

Mahesh Kumar Yadav

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dushyant Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

¶7

Court No. - 19

¶8

HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J.

¶9

Heard Sri Dushyant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anurag Kumar Maurya, learned State Counsel for respondents and perused the material available on record.

¶10

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

¶11

"(i) to issue a suitable direction commanding the opposite party no. 2 i.e., Additional Commissioner (Administration), Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya to decide the Appeal No. 1711 of 2016, under Section 331 (3) of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act (Suresh Kumar Vs. Ramesh Chandra) pending before him within specific time frame as Court may deem fit just and proper.

¶12

(ii) any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit just and proper may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice."

¶13

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners is suffering hardship because of the pendency of the aforesaid proceeding before the respondent No. 2. It is further stated that the private opposite parties have already appeared before the court concerned and filed their objection.

¶14

A227 No. 1802 of 2026

¶15

2

¶16

Para 458 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual provides as under:

¶17

" 458. Speedy Disposal- (1) The court shall endeavour to finally decide the suit within a period of one year from the date of institution of the suit and if the suit is not decided within the period aforesaid, the reason for the same shall be recorded.

¶18

(2) The appellate or the revisional court shall endeavour to finally decide the appeal or revision, as the case may be, within a period of six months from the date of filing the appeal or revision and if the appeal or revision is not decided within the aforesaid period, the reason for the same shall be recorded. "

¶19

Under clause 458 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual there is a clear legislative mandate that if proceedings are not concluded within the period of time as provided under the aforesaid provision, reasons for the same shall be recorded.

¶20

Learned State Counsel submits that he has no objection in the disposal of the present petition with direction to the court concerned for expeditious disposal of the above mentioned case, much less, within the time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶21

In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, the service of notice upon the respondent No. 4 to 8 is dispensed with.

¶22

In view of the above, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this writ petition pending. Accordingly, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya (respondent No. 2) before whom the Appeal No. 1711 of 2016 under Section 331 (3) of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act is pending for disposal, to decide the same in accordance with law, by a reasoned order, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months in the light of the time frame laid down under clause 458 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order

¶23

A227 No. 1802 of 2026

¶24

3

¶25

without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

¶26