SHYAM LAL v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PRATAPGARH AND OTHERS
A227/6538/2025 · 2025-11-10
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 185347 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 185347 (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. - 6538 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.
1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Yogesh Kumar Awasthi, 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. 2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil - Lalganj, District - Pratapgarh, to decide Case No. 1942 of 2016 (Computerized Case No. T 20160257021942) - Ram Sajeevan & Others Vs. Lalji, U/S 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, expeditiously.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently met in case respondent no. 2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil - Lalganj, District - Pratapgarh, 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. 2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil - Lalganj, District - Pratapgarh, is directed to decide Case No. 1942 of 2016 (Computerized Case No. T 20160257021942) - Ram Sajeevan & Others Vs. Lalji, U/S 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, 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.
November 10, 2025 A. Verma Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashok Kumar Maurya, Priyanshi Maurya, Rekha Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta (Alok Mathur,J.) Shyam Lal .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Pratapgarh And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench