Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:12025 Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 30296 of 2024 Petitioner :- Durgawati Devi Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Aravind Kumar Maurya Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep Singh Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-opposite parties no.1, 2 & 4, and Shri Pradeep Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4. 2. The present petition has been filed with a limited prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing respondent No2/Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil-Madihan, District-Mirzapur to the Case No. NIL of 2024 (Durgawati Devi vs. State of U.P. & Ors.) under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, expeditiously within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner by inviting the attention of this Court towards Section 24(3) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 submits that it is the bounden duty rather obligation on the court to make an endeavour to finally decide the case within a period of six months from the date of filing the case, but in spite of the aforesaid obligation, the case has not yet been decided though it is pending since 2016. For the sake of convenience, Section 24(3) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is extracted herein-below:- "24. Disputes regarding boundaries.(1) The Sub-Divisional Officer may, on his own motion or on an application made in this behalf by a person interested, decide, by summary inquiry, any dispute regarding boundaries on the basis of existing survey maps or, where they have been revised in accordance with the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, on the basis of such maps, but if this is not possible, the boundaries shall be fixed on the basis of actual possession. (2) If in the course of an inquiry into a dispute under sub-section (1), the Sub-Divisional Officer is unable to satisfy himself as to which party is in possession or if it is shown that possession has been obtained by wrongful dispossession of the lawful occupant, the Sub-Divisional Officer shall? (a) in the first case, ascertain by summary inquiry who is the person best entitled to the property, and shall put such person in possession; (b) in the second case, put the person so dispossessed in possession, and for that purpose use or cause to be used such force as may be necessary and shall then fix the boundary accordingly. (3) Every proceeding under this section shall, as far as possible, be concluded by the Sub-Divisional Officer within six months from the date of the application. (4) Any person aggrieved by the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer may prefer an appeal before the Commissioner within 30 days of the date of such order. The order of the Commissioner shall be final." 5. Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has taken a plea that the application does not appear to be filed in prescribed format. 6. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner moves an application on the prescribed format before opposite party no.2 within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided by him, say, within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after affording opportunity of hearing to the aggrieved parties without prejudice to their rights. . (Brij Raj Singh, J.) Order Date :- 23.1.2025 SY Digitally signed by :- SWETA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SWETA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SWETA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad