HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6837 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. Order on application for amendment 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for amendment 2. By means of this amendment application the petitioner has prayed to permit him to amend the memo of the present petition and allow him to write as "opposite party no.1 Sub Divisional Magistrate/ Additional Officer Sadar, District Ayodhya" in place of State of Uttar Pradesh, through Collector Ayodhya, District Ayodhya. 3. Learned counsel for respondents has no objection to the aforesaid prayer. 4. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction as prayed, during the course of the day. Order on Memo of Writ Petition 1. Shri Tushar Kant Mishra has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2- Nagar Ayukt Ayodhya, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Shri Yogesh Kumar Awasthi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1 and Shri Tushar Kant Mishra, learned counsel for respondent no.2. 3. In view of the order proposed to be passed, notice to private respondents, is dispensed with. 4. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for direction to Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shobh Nath Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Deena Nath Maurya .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Collector, Ayodhya And Others .....Respondent(s) the respondent No.1- i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate/ Additional Officer Sadar, District Ayodhya to decide the Case No. 296/2019, Computerized Case No. T201904230100296 under Section 59 U.P. Tenancy Act 1939 "Krishnakant & others Vs. State and others", expeditiously within time stipulated by this Hon'ble High Court. 5. 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. 6. Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the aforesaid prayer. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits, respondent no.1 - Sub Divisional Magistrate/ Additional Officer Sadar, District Ayodhya is directed to make all endeavor to decide the Case No. 296/2019, Computerized Case No. T201904230100296 under Section 59 U.P. Tenancy Act 1939 "Krishnakant & others Vs. State and others", expeditiously, say within a period of six 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. 8. 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. 9. With above observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. November 26, 2025 Muk A227 No. 6837 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench