Allahabad High Court
Ram Naresh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 8 March, 2021
Bench: Prakash Padia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4939 of 2021
Petitioner :- Ram Naresh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Yadav,Anand Kumar Prajapati
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Today Advocates are abstaining from work. I have perused the record. Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2.
The petitioner has preferred the present petition inter-alia with the prayer to direct the respondent no. 2 / Naib Tehsildar, (Centre) Phoolpur Prayagraj to decide the recall application dated 06.01.2021 filed by petitioner in Mutation Case No. 08440 of 2019 (Computerized Case No. T2019902030208440) under Section 34 U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (Sarvesh Kumar Mishra Vs. Mabood Ahmad @ Gulshan), Mauja Kanauja Khurd, Pargana Jhunsi, Tehsil Phoolpur, District Prayagraj within stipulated period.
It appears from perusal of the record that an order dated 21.09.2002 was passed by the respondents in favour of the respondent no. 3 namely Mahmood Ahmad @ Gulshan in the present writ petition. It is stated in paragraph-7 of the aforesaid writ petition that restoration application was filed by the petitioner on 10.05.2012. It is further stated that since the aforesaid application was not decided, the petitioner has approached before this Court by filing a Writ Petition being Writ Petition No. 59550 of 2017. The aforesaid writ petition was finally decided by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.12.2017. The order dated 14.12.2017 is reproduced below:-
"Heard Sri B. Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State-Respondents.
The petitioner in the writ petition is seeking a direction to the respondents to decide the restoration application (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) filed in Case No.423 of 2013 under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901. Copy of the order sheet has been filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition.
No useful purpose would be served by keeping this writ petition pending.
This writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties with a direction to the respondent no.3, Naib Tehsildar (Middle), Tehsil-Phoolpur, District Allahabad to consider and decide the restoration application in accordance with law, if possible, on the next date fixed.
It is made clear that the Court has not adjudicated the claim of the petitioner on merits.
It is also made clear that no unnecessary adjournment will be granted to either of the parties."
It is further stated that since the aforesaid order was not complied with Contempt Petition was also filed by the petitioner being Contempt Petition No. 3650 of 2018. Subsequent to the same an order dated 23.07.2018 was passed by the respondent no. 2 by which the restoration application filed by the petitioner was allowed and the case was registered on its original number. Since the matter was pending consideration for a long period, another writ petition was filed by the petitioner being Writ Petition No. 33199 of 2018. The aforesaid writ petition was finally decided by the another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 03.10.2018. The Judgment and Order dated 03.10.2018 is reproduced below:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents.
Present petition has been filed with a prayer that the respondent no. 2 be directed to decide Cases No. 423/2002 (Mahmood Ahmad vs. Dwarika Prasad) under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act within stipulated period.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no. 2 to expedite the hearing of the aforesaid case and decide the same, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order before him provided there is no other legal impediment.
A reference may also be made to the judgments of this Court in the cases of Chandra Bali vs. Additional Commissioner and others 2012 (4) ADJ 13 and Radha Devi vs. State of U.P. and others 2016 (6) ADJ 753 wherein directions for time bound disposal of such cases have been given and provisions of U.P. Janhit Guarantee Adhiniyam, 2011 have been considered.
With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the present petition is finally disposed of."
By the aforesaid order the directions were given to the respondent no. 2 to decide the aforesaid case expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months. It further reveals from perusal of the record that order dated 23.07.2018 was challenged by the respondent no. 3 before the Commissioner Allahabad Division Allahabad by filing a Revision No. 1729 of 2018. In the aforesaid case objections were duly filed by the petitioner. The aforesaid revision is still pending. In the meanwhile respondent no. 3 has sold the land in dispute by registered sale deed in favour of the respondent no. 4. After the aforesaid sale deed was executed by the respondent no. 3 in favour of the respondent no. 4 an application for mutation was filed and the same was allowed vide order dated 06.10.2020. It is stated in paragraph-17 of the writ petition that objection in the aforesaid mutation case was filed by the petitioner on 15.07.2018, which was taken on record but without considering the same an order dated 06.10.2020 was passed by the respondent no. 2. It is further stated in the writ petition that when the petitioner came to know regarding the aforesaid he filed an application to recall the aforesaid order vide application dated 06.01.2021. It is stated that the petitioner is still in possession upon the land in dispute since long period.
In this view of the matter it is stated that the respondent no. 2 is directed to decide the recall application filed by the petitioner expeditiously and with the further prayer to direct the respondents to maintain status quo till the disposal of the recall application. It appears from perusal of the record that application dated 06.01.2021 is pending consideration before the respondent no. 2.
Without entering into the merits of the case the present writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the respondent no. 2/Naib Tehsildar, (Centre) Phoolpur, Prayagraj to decide the recall application dated 06.01.2021 filed by the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 8.3.2021
Swati
