Shrikant And Other vs Board Of Revenue, Lucknow Thru. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 14993 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 20
 

 
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4115 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Shrikant And Other
 
Respondent :- Board Of Revenue, Lucknow Thru. Its Chairman And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Kumar Pathak,Angad Kumar Vishwakarma
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 5 has been accepted by the office of the Chief Standing Counsel. Sri Mohan Singh, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 4.

In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent No.2, 3 and 6 are dispensed with.

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of his Case No.SA/735/2022/Sultanpur (Computerized Case No. R202046800735 (Shrikant and Others Vs. Brij Lal) filed under Section 208 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 pending before the respondent No.1.

The petitioner has approached this Court with the limited prayer that he had preferred a second appeal which is pending before the Board of Revenue. In the aforesaid appeal, the private respondents have put in appearance through caveat and was admitted, however, his application for interim relief was deferred.

It is further submitted that though the number of dates have been fixed but his application for interim relief has yet not been decided.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, 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. 1 to consider and decide the pending application preferrably on the next date after affording full opportunity to the parties but without granting any unnecessary adjournments, however, in case if the same is not possible, then the same application be decided within a period of four weeks thereafter from the date a certified copy of the order is placed before the Authority concerned.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Mool Chand Yadav and Another Vs. Raza Buland Sugar Company Limited Rampur and others reported in (1982) 3 SCC 484 for perusal, however, considering the fact that the matter is already listed before the Court concerned, accordingly, the dictum of the aforesaid judgment will not come in the way.

It is made clear that the 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 :- 21.10.2022

Asheesh