Allahabad High Court
Vinod Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 7 Others on 12 August, 2021
Bench: Ajay Bhanot
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19472 of 2021
Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Misra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Sri Anil Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
The revision under Section 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 was instituted by the petitioner in the year 2016, which came to be registered as Revision no. C2016020000132/2016 (Vinod Kumar and others Vs Girish Chandra and others) and is pending in the court of learned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj.
Sri Anil Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid revision has not been decided till date. There is no good cause for indefinite delay in deciding the revision.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all defendants in the revision are duly represented before the revising court. The revision was heard on merits and the judgment was reserved in the year 2016. However the final judgment has not been rendered till date. The matter pertains to demarcation of the boundaries, and in absence of a final decision, inconvenience is being caused to all parties.
The only prayer made by Sri Anil Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the revision registered as Revision no. C2016020000132/2016 (Vinod Kumar and others Vs Girish Chandra and others), may be decided within a stipulated period of time.
Learned Standing Counsel submits that the learned revising court is under an obligation of law to decide the revision within a reasonable period of time, after hearing all parties to the lis.
No lis can remain pending indefinitely before a court of law. Prolonged pendency of a lis without good cause may lead to miscarriage of justice. There is no good cause for delay in deciding the revision proceedings in the instant case.
No useful purpose will be served by exchanging the pleadings and keeping this writ petition pending before this Court.
The matter is remitted to thelearned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj.
A writ in the nature of mandamus is issued commanding thelearned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj, to execute the following directions:
(I) The learned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj, shall decide the revision registered as Revision no. C2016020000132/2016 (Vinod Kumar and others Vs Girish Chandra and others) within a period of three months from the date of production of a computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the website of High Court, Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned and the authority/official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(II) All parties to the lis shall be given an opportunity of hearing before the final order is passed.
(III) All parties to the lis are directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the learned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj.
(IV) In case any party does not cooperate in the proceedings before the learned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj, or adopts dilatory tactics, the learned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj, shall record a finding to this effect and proceed in accordance with law.
(V) The learned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj shall give short dates in the revision proceedings.
(VI) The learned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj, shall not grant any unnecessary adjournment to the parties.
(VII) In case an adjournment is granted in the paramount interest of justice, the learned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj, shall impose costs not below Rs.1500/- for each adjournment upon the party seeking adjournment.
(VIII) If necessary, the learned revising court/Divisional Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj, shall proceed on day to day basis to ensure that the above stipulated timeline of three months to decide the revision is strictly adhered to.
With the aforesaid directions, the petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 12.8.2021
Pravin
