TIRBHUWAN NATH PANDEY v. ADDL. COMMISSIONER FAIZABAD DIVISION, FAIZABAD AND OTHERS
A227/7280/2025 · 2025-12-17
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 179439 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 179439 (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. - 7280 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 respondent.
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.1 Additional Commissioner, Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya to decide recall application in Appeal No.108/99 (Sitaram Vs. Kamta Prasad and others), under Section 331(3) of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, expeditiously.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently met in case aforesaid case is decided in a 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.1 Additional Commissioner, Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya to decide recall application in Appeal No.108/99 (Sitaram Vs. Kamta Prasad and others), under Section 331(3) of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 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) : Prashant Yadav, Pramod Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Alok Mathur,J.) Tirbhuwan Nath Pandey .....Petitioner(s) Addl. Commissioner Faizabad Division, Faizabad And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench