SMT. DHOOP MATI YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT., LKO. AND OTHERS
A227/5237/2025 · 2025-09-02
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 160328 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 160328 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5237 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.
1. Heard Sri Ravindra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
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. 2 - Tehsildar, Tehsil - Aalapur, District - Ambedkar Nagar, to decide Case No. T-202304040401185 - Dhoop Mati Vs. Dee Narayan and Another, U/S 34 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. 2 - Tehsildar, Tehsil - Aalapur, District - Ambedkar Nagar, considers and decides the aforesaid case in the time bound manner.
5. Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the aforesaid prayer.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits of the case, respondent no. 2 - Tehsildar, Tehsil - Aalapur, District - Ambedkar Nagar, is directed to decide Case No. T-202304040401185 - Dhoop Mati Vs. Dee Narayan and Another, U/S 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, expeditiously, say within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.
7. It is further directed that the parties to the case shall cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment, neither any such adjournment shall be granted by the Court concerned, except in exceptional circumstances.
8. With above observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
September 2, 2025 A. Verma Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravindra Kumar Yadava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Alok Mathur,J.) Smt. Dhoop Mati Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench