Raja Ram vs State Of U.P. And 13 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 37406 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Raja Ram vs State Of U.P. And 13 Others on 13 November, 2024

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:178125
 
Court No. - 34
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31551 of 2024
 
Petitioner :- Raja Ram
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 13 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Subhash Chandra Tiwari,Vibhu Rai
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Azad Rai,C.S.C.,Indra Jit Singh,K.C. Mishra
 

 
Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking following relief :-

"I. Issue an appropriate writ order or direction quashing the order dated 09.09.2024 passed by Additional Commissioner, Prayagraj passed in Appeal No. 1751 of 2024 (Annexure No. 1).

II. Issue an appropriate writ order or direction quashing the order dated 08.08.2024 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar Prayagraj passed in Case No. 3234 of 2024 (Annexure No. 2).

III. Issue an appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents to not disposes the petitioner during and until the pendency of the appeal filed before the Additional Commissioner, Prayagraj bearing Appeal No. 1751 of 2024.

IV. Issue an appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondent Board of Revenue to expeditiously decide the transfer application filed under Section 212 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 bearing Transfer Case No. TA/3234 of 2024 and till then prohibit the Sub Divisional Magistrate to not to proceed with the case till the decision of transfer application before the Board of Revenue."

3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that an appeal filed by the petitioner against a judgement and decree passed in suit under Section 144 of U.P. Revenue Code, has been admitted by the First Appellate Court but the application for interim relief has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgement of the Apex Court in case of Mool Chand Yadav Vs. Raza Buland Sugar Company Limited reported in 1982 (3) SCC page No. 484 and judgment of this Court in case of Maheshwar Pratap Shahi Vs. State of U.P. and 5 Others in Writ B No. 412 of 2020 dated 13.02.2020.

4. Mr. O.P. Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of contesting respondents vehemently opposed the writ petition but could not dispute the proposition of law as laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Mool Chand Yadav (Supra).

5. Learned Standing Counsel, however, submitted that since the appeal is pending it will be in the interest of justice not to entertain this writ petition but to direct the Appellate Court to decide the appeal itself within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court. To this proposition learned counsel for petitioner has no objection.

6. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 2 to consider and decide this appeal expeditiously preferably within a period of 6 months, after providing an opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, in accordance with law, provided there is no other legal impediment.

7. Till the disposal of appeal, parties are directed to maintain status quo.

Order Date :- 13.11.2024

Saurabh

[Manish Kumar Nigam, J.]