MRITYUNJAY TRIPATHI v. TAHSILDAR, TAHSIL KUNDA, PRATAPGARH AND 4 OTHERS
A227/2907/2025 · 2025-05-16
Saurabh Lavania
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 139621 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 139621 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:28956 Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2907 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mrityunjay Tripathi Respondent :- Tahsildar, Tahsil Kunda, Pratapgarh And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Govind Kumar Pandey 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 stated that he may be permitted to delete a opposite party, which has wrongly been impleaded. Learned State Counsel has no objection to the prayer made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to delete the wrongly impleaded opposite party 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):-
"WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the opposite party no.1 to decide the Case No. 6056/2017, Computerized Case No.T201702570106056, U/S 34 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 titled "Smt. Aneeta and Another versus Ram Manohar", pending before him since 26/03/2008, expeditiously as early as possible within stipulated time, in the interest of justice." In view of the settled principles of law that mutation proceedings being summary in nature, should preferably be decided expeditiously and the case in issue is pending since 2008, this Court is of the view that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending. Accordingly the present petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.-1 to consider and decide the pending proceedings of Mutation case in Case No. 6056/2017, Computerized Case No.T201702570106056 (Smt. Aneeta and Another versus Ram Manohar), most expeditiously, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment, preferably within a period of three months from the next date fixed before it. 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 :- 16.5.2025 Jyoti/- Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench