Santosh Kumar Singh v. Collector/ District Magistrate, Pratapgarh and 9 Others

Court No. - 18 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5153 of 2023 Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Singh Respondent :- Collector/ District Magistrate, Pratapgarh And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pravin Kumar Singh,Ashutosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard. At the very outset, learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that inadvertently the proper necessary opposite party could not be arrayed in the memo of petition and as such he may be permitted to implead the proper opposite party. Learned State Counsel has no objection to the prayer made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to implead the necessary opposite party during the course of the day. In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondents is dispensed with. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of Case No. 2629/2022 (Kul Prakash and another Versus Shailendra Kumar and Others) under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (in short 'Code of 2006') pending before the respondent No.2/Sub Divisional Magistrate/Assistant Collector, Lalganj, District Pratapgarh, Sadar, Lucknow, pending since June 2022. It is stated that as per Rule 109(10) of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, a suit for partition should be decided preferably within a period of six months, however, in the instant case, the case is pending since 2016 and on account of pendency of the aforesaid case, petitioner is suffering great hardship. In these circumstances, indulgence of this Court is required. Prayer is to direct the respondent no.2, to consider and decide the proceedings expeditiously. Learned standing counsel submits that he has no objection in case an expedite order is passed. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending rather ends of justice can be served by directing the respondent No.2 to consider and decide the pending proceedings of Case No. 2629/2022 (Kul Prakash and another Versus Shailendra Kumar and Others) most expeditiously, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably within a period of six months from the next date fixed before it, if possible and if there is no other legal impediment in this regard. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to appear before the authority concerned on the date fixed, in that eventuality he would not get the benefit of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law. With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 11.10.2023 Jyoti/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench