AYAZ AHMAD v. SUB DISTRICT MAGISTRATE (JUDICIAL) TILOI, AMETHI AND OTHERS
/4834/2025 · 2025-08-13
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 157301 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 157301 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47709 Court No. - 5 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4834 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ayaz Ahmad Respondent :- Sub District Magistrate (Judicial) Tiloi, Amethi And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravindra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Ravindra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent.
2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, requirement of issuance of notice to private respondents is dispensed with.
3. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for direction to the respondent No. 1 - Sub Divisional Magistrate (Judicial), Tiloi, District - Amethi, to decide Case No. 9814 of 2025 (Computerized Case No. T202504710809814) - Ayaz Ahmad and Others Vs. Mohd. Akhtar Husain and Others, U/S 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, expeditiously.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently met in case respondent no. 1 - Sub Divisional Magistrate (Judicial), Tiloi, District - Amethi, considers and decides the aforesaid case in the time bound manner.
5. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has opposed the writ petition by submitting that petitioner is praying for expeditious disposal of a case filed in 2025 itself. He has further submitted that there are other numerous cases pending before the Courts which have been filed earlier and are pending consideration, hence directing the trial Courts to decide the cases filed recently, is not sustainable, in the light of heavy pendency.
6. In view of above, this Court is of the considered view that the trial Courts/authorities are burdened with the heavy pendency of cases and they are trying hard to cope up with the pendency of cases. Therefore, this Court in the light of the fact that the case in question is filed in 2025 itself, is not inclined to interfere in the matter under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
7. With above present the writ petition is dismissed, at this stage. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench