PAWAN KUMAR SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. REVENUE CIVIL SECTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER
/6787/2025 · 2025-11-28
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 177824 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 177824 (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. - 6787 of 2025 Court No. - 17 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
1. Heard Sri Ravindra Shukla, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Seema Dixit, the learned Standing Counsel for the State who has raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has wrongly impleaded the State of U.P. as an opposite party whereas the petition arises out of a civil suit in which the State is not a party.
2. Confronted with the aforesaid objection, the learned counsel for the petitioner conceded that he has erroneously impleaded the State of U.P. as an opposite party and he made an oral prayer for deleting the State of U.P. from the array of opposite party which prayer is allowed and the the learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to incorporate the correction forthwith.
3. By means of the instant petition the petitioner is seeking issuance of a direction to the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 15, Sultanpur to decide Regular Suit No. 382 of 2023 expeditiously.
4. The aforesaid suit has been filed by the opposite party-Shankar Singh for perpetual injunction against the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that no temporary injunction order has been passed against the petitioner but the petitioner is merely aggrieved by the delay in disposal of the suit.
5. It is a matter of common knowledge that all the courts in the State are Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravindra Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Pawan Kumar Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s)
working under heavy work pressure and in these circumstances, when no prejudice is being caused to the petitioner by pendency of the petition or no failure of justice is being caused to him, no direction can be issued for expeditious disposal of the suit filed by the opposite party in the year
2023.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed at this stage. November 28, 2025 Pradeep/- A227 No. 6787 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench