Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 175876 (ALL)

PRIYANKA SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE, LKO. AND OTHERS

A227/7245/2025 · 2025-12-17

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. - 7245 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 2. In view of the proposed order 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 (Judicial), Rudauli, Tehsil Rudauli, District Ayodhya to decide mutation case No.7089/2025, computerized case No.T202504230707089 "Priyanka Singh Vs. Asharam" under Section 34 of U.P. Revenue Code, expeditiously. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently met in case respondent no. 1 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, respondent no.2- Tehsildar (Judicial), Rudauli, Tehsil Rudauli, District Ayodhya is directed to decide mutation case No.7089/2025, computerized case No.T202504230707089 "Priyanka Singh Vs. Asharam" under Section 34 of U.P. Revenue Code, expeditiously, say within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned 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. Counsel for the petitioner undertakes that he shall cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case, failing which the benefit of this order shall not be available to the petitioner. 8. With above observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. December 17, 2025 RKM. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anjani Kumar Dvivedi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Alok Mathur,J.) Priyanka Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench