SUNITA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE, LKO AND 2 OTHERS
A227/2297/2025 · 2025-04-22
Saurabh Lavania
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 135744 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 135744 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22518 Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2297 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sunita Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh K. Tripathi,Pankaj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. At the very outset, learned Counsel for the petitioner says that details of opposite party in issue, have wrongly been mentioned, in the prayer clause. As such, he may be permitted to correct the said error, during the course of the day. On the request of learned Counsel for the petitioner, which has not been opposed, the prayer which is innocuous, is hereby acceded. Accordingly, the applicants is permitted to make necessary correction in the prayer clause, during the course of the day. In view of order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to the private-respondent(s) is hereby dispensed with. The instant petition has been preferred seeking following main relief(s):-
"(i) To issue an order or direction thereby directing the opposite party no. 2 to decide the application of the petitioner dated 05.01.2021 moved under section 34 of Revenue Code, 2006, which has been registered as Case No. 202104040200448 "Sunita Vs Ram Lakhan", pending before the opposite party no. 3, within some stipulated time by the Hon'ble Court." Considering the fact that the case in issue relates to mutation and as per Rule 34(7) of U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 made under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, the mutation proceedings, being summary in nature, ought to have been decided within 45 days if there is no dispute and if there is dispute, then the same should preferably be decided within 90 days, however, in the instant case, the proceedings for mutation are pending since January 2021, this Court is of the view that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the present petition pending.
In view of above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 to consider and decide the Case No. 202104040200448 (Sunita Vs Ram Lakhan) most expeditiously after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties to the litigation and without granting unnecessary adjournment to either party preferably within a period of three months from the next date fixed in the case, if there is no other legal impediment in this regard. It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either party 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 :- 22.4.2025 Jyoti/- Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench