Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30799 Court No. - 37 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5330 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sunit Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhrigu Jee Singh,Saurabh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J. 1. Heard Sri Saurabh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Raj Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The present writ petition has been filed, inter-alia, for the following relief: "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no.2 - Tehsildar (Judicial) Tehsil - Ballia Sadar, District Ballia to decide Mutation Case No.11163 of 2024 (Computerized Case No.T202415090311163) (Sunit Kumar Vs. Santosh Kumar Pandey), under Section 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, Mauza - Arazi Mafi Pipra, Pargana, Tehsil and District Ballia, within stipulated period." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Mutation Case No.11163 of 2024 (Computerized Case No.T202415090311163) (Sunit Kumar Vs. Santosh Kumar Pandey), under Section 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, is pending for disposal since the year 2024 before respondent No.2, but till date no final order has been passed and because of the pendency of the said case the petitioner is facing undue hardship. 4. Sub-rule 7 of Rule 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 provides as under: "............(7). The Tahsildar shall make an endeavour to decide the undisputed case of mutation within the period of 45 days from the date of the registration of the case and the disputed case of mutation within the period of 90 days and if the proceeding is not concluded within such period the reason for the same shall be recorded." 5. There is a clear legislative mandate that if proceedings are not concluded within stipulated period of time as provided under the aforesaid provision, reasons for the same shall be recorded. 6. Learned Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection, if a direction is issued by this Court for expeditious disposal of the case within stipulated period as to be fixed by this Court. 7. In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, the service of notice upon the opposite party nos.3 to 5 is dispensed with. 8. 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. 9. 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.2 - Tehsildar (Judicial) Tehsil - Ballia Sadar, District Ballia, before whom the aforementioned matter is pending for disposal, to decide Mutation Case No.11163 of 2024 (Computerized Case No.T202415090311163) (Sunit Kumar Vs. Santosh Kumar Pandey), under Section 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, strictly in accordance with law, by a reasoned order on merit after affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, expeditiously and preferably within a period of ninety days 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. 10. 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