Allahabad High Court
Gopal Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 February, 2020
Author: Ajay Bhanot
Bench: Ajay Bhanot
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 3 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 944 of 2020 Petitioner :- Gopal Singh And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Shankar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
The only prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners is to decide the proceedings of a case, registered as Land Acquisition Reference No. 434 of 1997 (Kangali Vs. State of U.P. and others), pending before the learned Additional District Judge-I, Gautam Budh Nagar, be decided within a stipulated period of time.
Shri Dinesh Shankar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the case was instituted in the year 1997. He calls attention to the order-sheet to submit that the matter is being adjourned and a final decision is being inordinately delayed for no good reason.
I see merit in the submission of Shri Dinesh Shankar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners that inordinate delay in deciding the land acquisition reference would defeat the very purpose of granting timely compensation. The requisite compensation has not been paid to the petitioners long after their lands have been acquired.
Further, from a bare perusal of the order-sheet, this Court finds that the reference case has been pending for more than 22 years. No good reason or valid basis in law can be prised out from the ordersheet for the inordinate delay in deciding the case. No lis can remain pending indefinitely before a court of law. Indefinite pendency of a lis goes to the root of administration of justice. There is merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners.
In view of the preceding discussion, the matter is remitted to the learned Reference Court / the learned Additional District Judge-I, Gautam Budh Nagar, before whom the Land Acquisition Reference No. 434 of 1997 (Kangali Vs. State of U.P. and others), is pending to execute the following directions:
(I) The learned Reference Court / the learned Additional District Judge-I, Gautam Budh Nagar, is directed to decide the Land Acquisition Reference No. 434 of 1997 (Kangali Vs. State of U.P. and others), within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
(II) The learned Reference Court / the learned Additional District Judge-I, Gautam Budh Nagar, shall not grant any unnecessary adjournment to the parties.
(III) In case any adjournment is granted in the paramount interest of justice, the learned Reference Court / the learned Additional District Judge-I, Gautam Budh Nagar, shall impose costs not below Rs. 5,000/- for each adjournment upon the party seeking adjournment.
(IV) In case the counsel for any party does not appear before the learned Reference Court / the learned Additional District Judge-I, Gautam Budh Nagar, on any date on the ground of strike of advocates, the learned Reference Court / the learned Additional District Judge-I, Gautam Budh Nagar, shall not permit such counsel (of either party) to appear in this case on future dates.
(V) The learned Reference Court / the learned Additional District Judge-I, Gautam Budh Nagar, shall proceed with the trial on a day to day basis, if required, to ensure that the above stipulated time limit to decide the aforesaid reference case within a period of one year is strictly adhered to.
With the aforesaid direction, the petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 4.2.2020 Dhananjai