Mohd Umar And Another vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 6 October, 2025

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Mohd Umar And Another vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 6 October, 2025

Bench: Rohit Ranjan Agarwal





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:176144
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
WRIT - C No. - 34640 of 2025   
 
   Mohd Umar And Another    
 
  .....Petitioner(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of U.P. And 5 Others    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Petitioner(s)   
 
:   
 
Sarve Nazir, Zafar Abbas   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
C.S.C.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 33
 
   
 
 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.

1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

"Issue an Mandamus commanding/directing the respondent No. 4 to decide the Case no. 2164 of 2021, Computer Case No. T202115060302164 ( Amina Vs Ram Singa) Under Section 34/35 of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code 2006 pending in the court of Tahseeldar, Tahseel Phulpoor, District Azamgarh within stipulated period."

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that Mutation Case No. 2164 of 2021 under Section 34/35 of U.P Revenue Code 2006 is pending consideration. 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.

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. 4 is hereby directed to conclude the proceedings of mutation Case No. 2164 of 2021, Computerized Case No. T-202115060302164, filed under Section 34/35 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.

(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) October 6, 2025 Shekhar

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Allahabad High Court