Gorakh Nath and Another v. Naib Tehsildar, Tehsildar Aasal, Amethi and Another

Court No. - 21 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5885 of 2023 Petitioner :- Gorakh Nath And Another Respondent :- Naib Tehsildar, Tehsildar Aasal, Amethi And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Pratap Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶1Heard Sri Narendra Pratap Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Praful Kumar Yadav, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no.1 and perused the record.

¶2The instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia, for the following relief: "(i) To issue order or direction to the opposite party no. 1 for deciding the case no. 4170 / 2021 bearing Computerized Case No. T202104710504170 (Gorakh Nath & another Vs. Vidyawati) under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 in the interest of justice."

¶3The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the proceeding in Case No. 4170 / 2021, Computerized Case No. T202104710504170 (Gorakh Nath & another Vs. Vidyawati) under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending before the respondent no. 1 but till date the said proceeding has not been concluded and because of the pendency of the said case the petitioners are facing undue hardship.

¶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."

¶5Since, 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.

¶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 above mentioned case, within stipulated period as fixed by this Court.

¶7In view of the nature of the proposed order to be passed, the service of notice upon the respondent no. 2 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, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition, with a direction to the respondent no. 1, before whom the Case No. 4170 / 2021, Computerized Case No. T202104710504170 (Gorakh Nath & another Vs. Vidyawati) under Section 35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending for disposal, to decide the same 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.

¶10With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 17.11.2023 Arif High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench