Shanti Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Court No. - 49 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42620 of 2023 Petitioner :- Shanti Devi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶1Heard Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anand Kumar Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent nos. 1 & 2 and perused the record.

¶2The present 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. 1361 (T202202030406028) (Shanti Devi Vs. Daya Prasad), under Section 35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, pending before Nayab Tehsildar Pratappur, Tehsil Handia, District Prayagraj, within stipulated period as directed by this Hon'ble Court.

(ii) .....................

(iii) ...................."

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case under Section 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending for disposal since 2020 before the respondent No.2 but till date the proceeding has not been concluded.

¶4Sub 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."

¶5There 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.

¶6Learned Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection to the extent that a direction is issued by this Court for expeditious disposal of the case within stipulated period as to be fixed by this Court.

¶7In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, the service of notice upon the respondent no. 3 is dispensed with.

¶8Taking 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.

¶9Accordingly, 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 Naib Tehsildar, Pratappur, Tehsil Handia, District Prayagraj (respondent No. 2), before whom the aforementioned matter is pending for disposal, to to decide the Case No. 1361 (T202202030406028)(Shanti Devi Vs. Daya Prasad), under Section 34/35 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 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 be granted to either of the parties and the adjournment, if prayed for, will be permissible to be granted only in exceptional circumstances.

¶10With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 8.12.2023 Prajapati High Court of Judicature at Allahabad