DEVI SHANKER SHUKLA AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS
WRIC/32475/2025 · 2025-09-16
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 96600 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 96600 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 32475 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:
"a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent to decide the application filed by the petitioner under section 30 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents authorities to restrain the respondent no.4 to 10 not construct any Road upon the bhomidhari land of the petitioner bearing gata no. No.548 measuring area 0.520 hectare and arazi no.525 measuring area 0.254 hectare situated in village tulsikala Uparwar Taluka Kodh, Tehsil Gyanpur District Bhadohi till the disposal of the application file by the petitioner under section 30 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 pending before the respondent no.2."
2. It is contended that proceedings under Section 30 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 are pending consideration before respondent no.2- District Magistrate, Bhadohi. The sole prayers made in the writ petition are to expedite the aforesaid proceedings.
3. As no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending, the writ petition is being disposed of, at the admission stage, without calling for counter affidavit, with a direction upon respondent no.2- District Magistrate, Bhadohi to expeditiously conclude the proceedings which are pending under Section 30 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, in accordance with law, after hearing all affected parties, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
4. With the aforesaid direction, present writ petition stands disposed of.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the case on merit. September 17, 2025 SK Goswami Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Brijesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : Arun Kumar Pandey, C.S.C., Pradeep Singh (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Devi Shanker Shukla And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 9 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad