Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 151196 (ALL)

KANTI MISHRA v. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION / ADDL. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, AMETHI AND 4 OTHERS

WRIB/661/2025 · 2025-07-15

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40199 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 661 of 2025 Petitioner :- Kanti Mishra Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation / Addl. District Magistrate, Amethi And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mukesh Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Mukesh Kr. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In view of the proposed order notice to private respondents are dispensed with. 3. By means of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India a prayer has been made for expeditious disposal of Revision No. 1536/2024, Computerized Case No. 202454047100001536 (Ramgopal and another Vs. Kanti Mishra and others) U/S 48(!) of U.P. C.H. Act, 1953 filed by respondent Nos. 2 & 3 pending before Dy. Director of Consolidation/Additional District Magistrate, District Amethi. 4. It is urged that though the matter is being listed but for one reason or the other, the aforesaid revision is not being decided. 5. After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for petitioner submits that trial Court may be directed to decide the aforesaid revision in a time bound manner. 6. At this stage, no ground for urgency is made out by the petitioner, hence, this Court/competent authority is not inclined to interfere in the matter under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the trial court/competent authority and move an appropriate application detailing urgency for expeditious disposal of aforesaid revision, within two weeks from today, and in case, if such an application is moved, the trial Court/competent authority shall consider and decide the same within three weeks thereafter, and in case any case for urgency is made out by the petitioner, it shall pass appropriate orders thereupon, in accordance with law. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merit and the Court /competent authority concerned shall decide the matter strictly in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 15.7.2025/Ravi/ Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench