HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31628 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:- "1. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent no.2/ Tehsildar, Tehsil- Sirathu, District- Kaushambi to decide the Case No. 345 of 2025, Computerized Case No. T202502420400345 (Surendra Kumar Versus Devdutt Pandey) U/s 34 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, pending before him, within specific period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court" 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that Case No. 345 of 2025, Computerized Case No.T202502420400345 (Surendra Kumar Versus Devdutt Pandey) U/s 34 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending consideration before respondent no.2- Tehsildar, Tehsil- Sirathu, District- Kaushambi. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said case may be decided expeditiously. 3. This Court on 02.07.2025 had required Sri Manish Goyal, learned Additional Advocate General to get instructions from State Government as to why petitions in such a large number are being filed in this Court for expediting mutation proceedings. 4. Pursuant to query made by this Court, learned Additional Advocate General placed before the Court the circular issued by State Government on 09.07.2025 wherein a direction has been issued by State Government to all Collectors of the State requiring Tehsildars and Sub Divisional Officers of the Tehsil and Division to conclude the mutation proceedings within the time period prescribed under the Code. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akshat Jaiswal, Om Prakash Yadav, Onkar Nath Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Surendra Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. This Court requires that each and every Tehsildar and Sub Divisional Officer of the State should immediately comply the directions issued by State Government and in case the mutation applications are kept pending and are not decided within the time frame as provided under the Circular dated 09.07.2025 or as provided under the Code, 2006 or directed by this Court, it would amount to civil contempt under Section 2(e) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Without any further direction, the officer will be held disobedient of the order of this Court and would be guilty of contempt. 6. In view of said fact, respondent no.2- Tehsildar, Tehsil- Sirathu, District- Kaushambi is hereby directed to conclude the proceedings of Case No. 345 of 2025, Computerized Case No.T202502420400345 (Surendra Kumar Versus Devdutt Pandey) U/s 34 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, positively within a period of three months, from the date of production of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law, after hearing all the affected parties. 7. With the aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the matter on merits. September 11, 2025 SK Goswami WRIC No. 31628 of 2025 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad