SMT. PARVATI v. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER / UP ZILADHIKARI, TEHSIL MISRIKH, SITAPUR AND OTHERS
A227/4828/2025 · 2025-08-12
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 157300 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 157300 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47142 Court No. - 5 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4828 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Parvati Respondent :- Sub Divisional Officer / Up Ziladhikari, Tehsil Misrikh, Sitapur And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gyanendra Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondent no.1 and Shri Dileep Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for Gaon Sabha.
2. In view of the proposed order to be passed, notice to private respondent, 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 to consider the appeal no. 3327 of 2025 computerized case no. T202510640103327, Case Parvati Versus Ram Veer under Section 35(2) of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 filed on 20.05.2025 relating to Village Chitrehta, Tehsil Misrikh, District Sitapur for preliminary/ interim / final orders within some stipulated time, as deem just and fit, looking into peculiar
facts and reasons of the case, in the interest of justice.
4. It has been submitted that the petitioner has filed an Appeal on 20.05.2025 under Section 35(2) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, against the judgment and order dated 19.04.2025. 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.
5. It is noticed that the instant matter relates to 2025 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 appeal which has been filed only in 2025. Accordingly, no case for interference is made out at this stage.
6. 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.
7. With aforesaid direction the petition stands disposed of. . (Alok Mathur, J.)
Order Date :- 12.8.2025 Muk Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench