KAMLA PRASAD @ KAMALA PRASAD SINGH v. CONSOLIDATION OFFICER, TEHSIL BIKAPUR, AYODHYA (FAIZABAD) AND OTHERS
A227/5516/2025 · 2025-09-15
Manjive Shukla
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 164770 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 164770 (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. - 5516 of 2025 Court No. - 30 HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Shri Surya Prakash Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No. 1. 2. In view of the order proposed, issuance of notice to Respondents No. 2 & 3 is hereby dispensed with. 3. The petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition inter alia praying therein for the following relief:-
"(i) To issue order or direction to the opposite party no. 1 i.e. Consolidation Officer, Tehsil- Bikapur, District-Ayodhya (Faizabad) to decide the case No 102, under section- 12 of U.P.C.H. Act for Mutation of the Khata No. 118, Gata no. 32/511/21114. Village- Parsuhi, Pargana- Paschimrath, Tehsil-Bikapur, District-Ayodhya (Faizabad) on the basis of registered sale deed, which is pending since 31.12.2002 as possible in the interest of justice."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner had filed a case for mutation of his name under Section 12 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 and the said case has been registered as Case No. 102, but, till date, said case has not been decided. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that a direction may be issued by this Court thereby commanding the Consolidation Officer, Tehsil - Bikapur, District - Ayodhya to consider and decide the case of the petitioner expeditiously. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Surya Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Kamla Prasad @ Kamala Prasad Singh .....Petitioner(s) Consolidation Officer, Tehsil Bikapur, Ayodhya (Faizabad) And Others .....Respondent(s)
6. Learned Standing counsel appearing for the State has also submitted that the ends of justice would be served if a direction is issued by this Court thereby commanding Respondent No. 1 to hear and decide the petitioner's case expeditiously within a fixed time frame. 7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and I find that the case filed by the petitioner under Section 12 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 is pending before Respondent No. 1 since year 2002. 8.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to Respondent No. 1 to hear and decide the Case No. 102 expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order, provided there is no legal impediment. September 15, 2025 Lokesh Kumar A227 No. 5516 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- LOKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench