Ashok Kumar Son of Late Shri Kailash Chand Vs Municipal Board, Kotputli — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ashok Kumar Son of Late Shri Kailash Chand Vs Municipal Board, Kotputli — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the prayer for time-bound directions to the Trial Court was declined and the writ petition was disposed of, with an expectation recorded that the Trial Court decide the suit expeditiously without entertaining unnecessary or unreasonable adjournment requests.

Issue for consideration

Whether this Court should issue directions to the learned Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate, Kotputli to decide Civil Suit No.121/2016 expeditiously, specifically in a time-bound manner within a period of six months.

Court's answer

Directions as prayed for cannot be issued by this Court: the practice of courts issuing directions to subordinate courts to decide matters within a stipulated timeline stands deprecated by the Apex Court in Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi v. State of Maharashtra (relying on the Constitution Bench judgment in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P.).

Ratio / Principle

Given the suit's pendency since 2016 and that the petitioner's evidence has not commenced, it is expected from the learned Trial Court to make all possible endeavours to decide the suit expeditiously, while ensuring that no unnecessary and unreasonable request for adjournment is entertained.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9939/2025 (Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench; Maneesh Sharma, J.; order dated 13/10/2025): Petitioners sought directions to the Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate, Kotputli to decide Civil Suit No.121/2016 – pending adjudication since 2016 with the petitioner's evidence not yet begun – in a time-bound manner within six months. Invoking Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi v. State of Maharashtra (2024 SCC Online SC 3526), which itself relied on the Constitution Bench judgment in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P. (2024 INSC 150), the Court held that it cannot issue directions directing subordinate courts to decide matters within a fixed timeline, such practice having been deprecated by the Apex Court. The Court accordingly disposed of the writ petition, expressing the expectation that the Trial Court make all possible endeavours for expeditious disposal of the suit while refusing to entertain unnecessary and unreasonable requests for adjournment.

[2025:RJ-JP:41646]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9939/2025

Ashok Kumar S/o late Shri Kailash Chand, aged about 58 Years,

Naresh Kumar S/o late Shri Kailash Chand, aged about 50 Years,

Suman Gupta D/o late Shri Kailash Chand, aged about 45 Years, All residents of Mohalla Buchaheda, Ward No. 9, Kasba Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj.)

----Petitioners

Versus

Municipal Board, Kotputli through the Chief Municipal Officer/Executive Officer

Chief Municipal Officer/ Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Kotputli

Chairman, Municipal Board, Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj.) 4. Director, Local Self Department, Jaipur, District Jaipur (Raj.)

Mahesh Kumar S/o Mange Lal Choudhary, R/o Mohalla Buchaheda, Old Ward No.17, New Ward No.9, Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Gupta For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA

Order

13/10/2025

By way of filing this writ petition, a prayer has been made for issuing directions to the learned Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate, Kotputli, District Jaipur to decide the Civil Suit No.121/2016 expeditiously.

(2 of 2)

[2025:RJ-JP:41646]

[CW-9939/2025]

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case is pending before the learned Trial Court for its adjudication since 2016 and nine years have passed, so appropriate directions be issued to the learned Trial Court to decide the said suit in time bound manner i.e. within a period of six months.

Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record.

The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi vs. State of Maharashtra¹ while relying on the constitutional Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of U.P.² , has deprecated the practice of the Courts of issuing directions to the subordinate Courts to decide the matter in a timeline.

The aforesaid directions, as prayed for, cannot be issued by this Court. But looking at the fact that the case is pending before the learned Trial Court for its adjudication since 2016; and evidence of the petitioner has not been started as yet. Therefore, it is expected from the learned Trial Court to make all possible endeavours to decide the suit expeditiously while ensuring that no unnecessary and unreasonable request for adjournment is entertained.

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of.

All pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(MANEESH SHARMA),J

DEEPA-20

1 2024 SCC Online SC 3526

2 2024 INSC 150