Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40017 (ALL)

GHANSHYAM v. STATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS

WRIC/11217/2025 · 2025-04-15

Manish Kumar Nigam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:55646 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11217 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ghanshyam Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar,Pulkith Sharan Shrivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi (respondent no.2) to decide the stay application filed in Case No.337 of 2025 (Computer Case No.C202506000000337), Ghanshyam Vs. Kalyan Singh & others, Under Section 207 Of U.P. Revenue code 2006, pending in his court expeditiously preferably within the short period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court. (II) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the revenue authorities not to harass and dispossess the petitioner from the land in question till the disposal revision pending before the respondent no.2." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that an appeal has been filed against final judgment passed in proceedings under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The appeal has been admitted but no order has been passed in the stay application. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mool Chand Yadav Vs. Raza Buland Sugar Company Limited reported in 1982 (3) SCC page No. 484 and submitted that application of stay of the petitioner be directed to be decided in accordance with law. 5. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending and it would be in the interest of justice to direct the appellate court to decide the stay application filed in appeal within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court. 6. In view of the same, respondent No. 2- Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi is directed to consider and decide the stay application filed in the appeal, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided that there is no other legal impediment. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. 8. Till the disposal of stay application in the appeal, parties are directed to maintain status quo. 9. It is made clear that petitioner will not seek any undue adjournment in the matter to keep the proceedings pending and in case, the petitioner seeks any unnecessary adjournment, the interim order granted by this Court shall stand automatically vacated. Order Date :- 16.4.2025 Nitika Sri. (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad