SMT. KESHPATI VERMA AND ANOTHER v. NAYAB TEHSILDAR, MASAUDHA, TEHSIL SOHAWAL, AYODHYA AND ANOTHER
A227/6752/2025 · 2025-11-18
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 188722 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 188722 (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. - 6752 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.
1. Heard Sri Akash Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri Yogesh Kumar Awasthi, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent.
2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, requirement of issuance of notice to private respondent is dispensed with.
3. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for direction to the respondent No. 1 - Nayab Tehsildar, Masaudha, Tehsil - Sohawal, District - Ayodhya, to decide Case No. RST/490 of 2023 (Computerized Case No. T 202304230200490) - Keshwati Verma Vs. Ram Johar, U/S 34 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. 1 - Nayab Tehsildar, Masaudha, Tehsil - Sohawal, District - Ayodhya, 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. 1 - Nayab Tehsildar, Masaudha, Tehsil - Sohawal, District - Ayodhya, is directed to decide Case No. RST/490 of 2023 (Computerized Case No. T 202304230200490) - Keshwati Verma Vs. Ram Johar, U/S 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, expeditiously, say within a period of four 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 18, 2025 A. Verma Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akash Tiwari, Arpit Dwivedi, Shivam Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Alok Mathur,J.) Smt. Keshpati Verma And Another .....Petitioner(s) Nayab Tehsildar, Masaudha, Tehsil Sohawal, Ayodhya And Another .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench