Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Allahabad High Court

Saritend Kumar Jaiswal vs State Of U.P. And 7 Others on 12 May, 2022

Author: Prakash Padia

Bench: Prakash Padia





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 18
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10854 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Saritend Kumar Jaiswal
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Harindra Prasad
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
 

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel accepted notice on behalf of State-respondents.

In view of the order proposed to be passed, notices need not go to the private respondents.

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with the prayer to issue a mandamus directing the respondent No.2/Sub Divisional Officer, Phoolpur District Prayagraj to decide Restoration Application dated 01.07.2020 filed in Case No.66/2015 (Computer Case No.T201502030200011) (Ram Shiromani Vs. Sarvesh and others) expeditiously.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that against the ex-parte order dated 14.11.2019, the petitioner preferred the restoration application on 01.07.2020 for recalling the aforesaid ex-parte order . It is argued that the matter is pending since long, till date no final decision has been taken in the matter, therefore, the petitioner is suffering from irreparable loss and injury and prays for expeditious disposal.

Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the prayer made by petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the parties present. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties present, the present writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the respondent No.2 to consider and decide the aforesaid restoration application in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order but certainly after giving opportunity to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment.

Order Date :- 12.5.2022 saqlain