Friday, 08, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sattar vs State Of Up And 3 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 15924 ALL

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 15924 ALL
Judgement Date : 7 May, 2024

Allahabad High Court

Sattar vs State Of Up And 3 Others on 7 May, 2024





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:81838
 
Court No. - 53
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14159 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Sattar
 
Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Tripathi,Akhilesh Kumar Mishra,Lavkush Yadav
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sunil Kumar Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no.1 to 3 and Sri Sunil Kumar Singh for the respondent no.4-gaon sabha.

2. By means of the present petition, prayer for expeditious and time bound disposal of Case No.3358 of 2023 (Computerized Case No. T202311730603358) (Sattar Vs. State of U.P. and others) under Section 144 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been made.

3. Recently, the Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of High Court Bar Association Allahabad vs. The State of U.P. and others (Criminal Appeal No. 3589 of 2023), decided on 29.02.2024, reported in 2024 (3) ADJ 295 (SC) has observed that no direction to dispose of cases in a time bound manner be issued by the Constitutional Courts, except in exceptional circumstances. Relevant paragraph of the aforesaid judgment is quoted as under:-

"37 . ...

a. ....

b.....

c. Constitutional Courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other Courts. Constitutional Courts may issue directions for the time-bound disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the concerned Courts where the cases are pending; and"

(emphasis supplied)

4. A perusal of the order sheet reveals that the petitioner is participating in the proceedings and after various dates, written statement was filed on 22.11.2023, since whereafter, the case is being posted for framing of issues but on account of Presiding Officer being busy in administrative work, the matter is not being decided.

5. Considering the material placed before this Court alongwith this petition, direction for expeditious disposal can be issued in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

7. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off with the following directions:-

(a). The court/ authority concerned where the aforesaid matter is pending, is directed to finally decide the same on its own merits, after providing full opportunity of hearing to the contesting parties within a period of six months from the date a certified/self attested copy of this order is produced before it;

(b). In case, the lawyers remain on strike, which has successively been held to be unconstitutional and illegal by the Apex Court in the cases of Ex. Capt. Harish Uppal vs. Union of India and another, AIR, 2003 SC 736; Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India, (1998) 4 SCC 409; Krishnakant Tamrakar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2018 (17) SCC 27 and Hussain v. Union of India, (2017) 5 SCC 702, the period, during which, the lawyers abstain themselves from work, shall remain excluded from the period fixed by this Court for disposal of the aforesaid matter;

(c). Since the petitioner side has come up for expeditious disposal of the aforesaid matter, in case, any adjournment is sought by the petitioner side before the court/ authority concerned, the benefit conferred under this order shall stand automatically discharged and vacated and the court/ authority concerned would not be obliged to decide the lis within the time frame fixed by this Court;

(d). It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated or commented upon merits of the aforesaid matter and it is for the court concerned to decide the same strictly in accordance with the statutory provisions and on its own merits and maintainability etc., after providing full opportunity of hearing to the contesting parties; and

(e). The petitioner is directed to serve a photostat copy of this order on the learned counsel representing the contesting party(ies) appearing before the court/authority concerned prior to filing of certified/self attested copy of this order before the court/authority concerned.

Order Date :- 7.5.2024

AKShukla/-

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter