Gopal v. The Board of Revenue Judicature and 5 Others

Court No. - 49 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 3532 of 2023 Petitioner :- Gopal Respondent :- The Board Of Revenue Judicature And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J. Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri T.P. Gupta, learned Standing Counsel representing respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 5 and Shri Bhupendra Kumar Triapthi, learned counsel for Gaon Sabha-respondent No. 6 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. 1/ the Board of Revenue at Prayagraj, U.P. to decide the stay application in revision No. 2652 of 2022 (Gopal vs. State of U.p. through Collector Jaunpur and others) under Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within stipulated period may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court." The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the aforesaid case is pending since 2022. He submits that the petitioner has filed a revision along with application for stay in the month of October, 2022 and since then the same is pending for disposal. He submits that the petitioner is suffering hardship because of the pendency of the aforesaid case before the respondent No. 1. Para 458 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual provides as under: "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.

(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. " 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. Learned Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection to the extent that a direction is issued by this Court for expeditious disposal of the above mentioned case, within stipulated period as fixed by this Court. In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, the service of notice upon the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 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 Board of Revenue at Prayagraj, U.P. (respondent No. 1), before whom the aforementioned matter is pending for disposal, to decide the revision No. 2652 of 2022 (Computerized Case No.AL20221436002652) (Gopal vs. State of U.p. through Collector Jaunpur and others) pending under Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, strictly in accordance with law, by a reasoned and speaking order on merit after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, expeditiously and preferably within a period of six 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. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 1.11.2023 Sumaira High Court of Judicature at Allahabad