Allahabad High Court
Reeta Gupta vs Tehsildar, Tehsil Sandeela ... on 19 September, 2023
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:59842
Court No. - 18
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4597 of 2023
Petitioner :- Reeta Gupta
Respondent :- Tehsildar, Tehsil Sandeela Distt. Hardoi And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Piyush Mishra,Amit Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. At the outset, Shri Amit Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Shri Piyush Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that some typographical error has been crept in the present petition and the same may be permitted to correct during the course of the day.
2. The prayer sought has not been opposed, accordingly, the prayer is allowed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to carry out necessary correction in the memo of petition particularly in Para(s) 3, 16, Grounds and Prayer clause.
4. Heard.
5. In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent(s) is dispensed with.
6. Present petition has been filed with the following main reliefs:
(i) direct the Tehsildar, Tehsil-Sandila, Distrit - Hardoi to decide the case filed by petitioner of Case No. 8911/2023 (Old No. 36/534) under Section 34 Land Revenue Act) Reeta Gupta Vs. Ram Kishore, pending before him, within stipulated time period.
(ii) direct the respondents not to alienate the property in question and maintain status-quo over the property in question till disposal of interim relief application/case.
7. It has been stated that the mutation case no. 36/534 under Section 30(4) of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 was finally decided vide order dated 25.10.1998 and on coming to know about the said order, the petitioner preferred an application dated 21.04.2022 for restoration of case along with an application for condonation of delay in preferring the said application and both are pending consideration, as such, the petitioner has approached this Court for main relief sought.
8. Shri Shashank Singh, learned Standing Counsel has referred the judgment passed by this Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ram Prakash vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Hardoi & Others, decided on 03.02.2022 wherein this Court has observed that the authority concerned shall first decide the application for condonation of delay and then he would proceed to decide the case on merits.
9. Considered the facts of case as also the prayers sought.
10. It is undisputed that the application(s), in issue, i.e. application for restoration of case and application for condonation of delay have not been disposed of till date.
11. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no.1/Tehsildar, Tehsil Sandila District- Hardoi to decide the pending application(s), as per law, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties within a maximum period of three months from the next date fixed, if possible and if there is no other legal impediment. The appropriate decision may be taken on the next date fixed itself in the matter which, as per learned counsel for the petitioner, is 29.09.2023, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties.
12. 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.
Order Date :- 19.9.2023/Mohit Singh/-
