SURENDRA KUMAR AND 5 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 10 OTHERS
WRIC/5345/2025 · 2025-03-03
S Q H Rizvi
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 21679 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 21679 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30675 Court No. - 37 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5345 of 2025 Petitioner :- Surendra Kumar And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Uttar Kumar Goswami Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.
1. Heard Sri Uttar Kumar Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Raj Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State - respondent nos.1 to 3.
2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief:-
"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent no.3 - Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Talbehat, District Lalitpur to decide Case No.RST/4544/2024 (Computerized Case No.T202406450204544) (Surendra Kumar and others Vs. Ramsahay and others), under Section 209 (Ja) of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, within stipulated period."
3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners filed a suit under Sections 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which was registered as Case No.27/19-20. The said suit was unfortunately dismissed in default on 11.02.2020. The petitioners filed an application for restoration along with application for condonation of delay on 26.10.2020 and since then the matter is pending for consideration. He has filed a copy of the
order sheet which shows that on 24.12.2024 the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Lalitpur - respondent no.3 had fixed the matter for hearing, but due to one reason or the other hearing of the case could not take place till date.
4. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that due to non-consideration of restoration application, the petitioners are facing undue hardship.
5. In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, the service of notice upon the respondent nos.4 to 11 is dispensed with.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this writ petition pending.
7. Accordingly, without adverting on merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition with direction to respondent no.3 - Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Talbehat, District Lalitpur to decide aforesaid application for restoration having Case No.RST/4544/2024 (Computerized Case No.T202406450204544) (Surendra Kumar and others Vs. Ramsahay and others), under Section 209 (Ja) of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, strictly in accordance with law, by a reasoned order on merit after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
order, unless there is any legal impediment. It is further directed that no unnecessary adjournments be granted to either of the parties and the adjournment, if prayed for, may be granted only in exceptional circumstances.
8. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is
disposed of.
Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Atul Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad