VIPENDRA KUMAR AND 2 OTHERS v. ADDL. COMMISSIONER, JUDICIAL, AYODHYA MANDAL, AYODHYA AND OTHERS
A227/6680/2025 · 2025-11-18
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 188987 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 188987 (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. - 6680 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Yogesh Kumar Awasthi, learned Standing counsel for State- respondent No.1 and Sri Mohan Singh for respondent No.2.
2. In view of the proposed order notice to private respondents is dispensed with.
3. The supplementary affidavit filed today in the Court is taken on record.
4. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioners praying for direction to the respondent No. 1 -Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya to decide appeal No.840 of 2025, computerized case No.C 202504000000840, under Section 24 (4) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 "Vipendra Kumar Tiwari and others Vs. Ram Milan and others", expeditiously.
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, to which learned Standing Counsel has no objection.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits, respondent no. 1 - Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya is directed to decide appeal No.840 of 2025, computerized case No.C 202504000000840, under Section 24 (4) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 "Vipendra Kumar Tiwari and others Vs. Ram Milan and others" expeditiously, say within a period of one year, if possible, from the date of production of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, 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 RKM. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anoop Kumar, Ankit Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Alok Mathur,J.) Vipendra Kumar And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) Addl. Commissioner, Judicial, Ayodhya Mandal, Ayodhya And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench