Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 153864 (ALL)

AJAY RASTOGI v. BOARD OF REVENUE U.P. LKO. CHAIRMAN AND 3 OTHERS

A227/4417/2025 · 2025-07-28

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43385 Court No. - 6 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4417 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ajay Rastogi Respondent :- Board Of Revenue U.P. Lko. Chairman And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pratibha Singh,Prashansa Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondent no.1. 2. In view of the proposed order, notice to respondents no. 2 to 4 is dispensed with. 3. Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to direct the respondent no.1 i.e. Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow to decide the Revision No. 2940 of 2024 (Krishna Gopal and others Vesus Ajay Rastogi and others), which is pending before him since 11.09.2024 within a time frame as stipulated by this Hon'ble Court. 4. It has been submitted that the respondents no. 2 to 4 have filed a revision before the respondent no.1 against the order dated 20.08.2024 passed by the Assistant Record Officer, District Ayodhya in Case No. 53/2015, computerized Case No. D201504230000048, under Section 27(3) of U.P. Revenue Code. It has been stated that the matter is urgent and a perusal of the order sheet clearly indicates that though the case is regularly listed but it is routinely adjourned on one pretext or the other. 4. It is noticed that the instant matter relates to 2024 and the trial courts are heavily burdened with the dockets due to which large number of cases are pending before them. In the present case, no extraordinary circumstance has been indicated by the petitioner so as to interfere and pass orders for expeditious disposal of the revision which has been filed only in 2024. Accordingly, no case for interference is made out at this stage. 5. However, looking to the aforesaid circumstances, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move appropriate application before the trial court within next two weeks for expediting the proceedings. In case, such an application is made, the trail court shall consider and decide the same within two weeks thereafter by a reasoned and speaking order. In case, the trial court finds that a case for urgency has been made out, it shall proceed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner expeditiously. 6. With aforesaid direction the petition stands disposed of. . (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Muk Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench