Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 166804 (ALL)

DR. R.S. GOEL AND 2 OTHERS v. BOARD OF REVENUE, U.P., LUCKNOW THRU. CHAIRMAN AND 3 OTHERS

A227/5847/2025 · 2025-09-25

Alok Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5847 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Saurabh Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners 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. 1 - Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow, to decide Revision No. REV/443/2019/Gorakhpur (Computerized Case No. R 2019053100443) - Sharda Devi and Others Vs. R.S. Goel, U/S 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901, expeditiously. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently met in case respondent no. 1 - Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow, 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. 1 - Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow, is directed to decide Revision No. REV/443/2019/Gorakhpur (Computerized Case No. R 2019053100443) - Sharda Devi and Others Vs. R.S. Goel, U/S 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 , expeditiously, say within a period of six 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 25, 2025 A. Verma Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Saurabh Srivastava, Nishant Kumar Shukla, Vipul Sinha Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Alok Mathur,J.) Dr. R.S. Goel And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) Board Of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow Thru. Chairman And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench