SHAHID ALI AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT., LKO. AND OTHERS
A227/6187/2025 · 2025-10-28
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 196586 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 196586 (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. - 6187 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents while notice on behalf of respondent No.4 has been accepted by Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey.
2. Instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner praying for direction to the respondent No.3- Consolidation Officer, Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow to decide application dated 8.11.2023 under rule 109 A (1) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954, expeditiously.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petition would be sufficiently met in case respondent no. 1 considers and decides the aforesaid case in the time bound manner.
4. Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the aforesaid prayer.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits, respondent no. 1-Consolidation Officer, Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow is directed to decide application dated 8.11.2023 under rule 109 A (1) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954 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.
6. 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.
7. With above observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. October 28, 2025 RKM. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rahul Srivastava, Gautam Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Dilip Kumar Pandey (Alok Mathur,J.) Shahid Ali And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench