Allahabad High Court
Mahendra Kumar Yadav And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., ... on 29 August, 2023
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:57636 Court No. - 18 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4375 of 2023 Petitioner :- Mahendra Kumar Yadav And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue, Lucknow And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Matri Datt Tripathi,Shresth Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondents is dispensed with.
The present petition has been filed for the following main relief:-
"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct/command the Opp. Party No. 2 (Tehsildar, Tehsil-Beekapur, District Ayodhya) to decide the pending Restoration Application dated 04.07.2022 filed by the Opp. Party No.3 namely Babulal against the Order Dated 14.05.2022 passed by the Opp. Party No. 2 in respect of mutation for the purchased land in favour of the petitioners, within a stipulated time framed by this Hon'ble Court to meet the end of justice which is pending since long time before the Opp. Party No. 2, but could not be heard and decided on merit till today as contained in Annexure No. 1 to this petition."
It is stated that mutation Case No. T202204230300406 (Mahendra Kumar and others Versus Smt. Rajpati), was decided vide order dated 14.05.2022 and the said final order was favourable to the petitioners, however, the private opposite party no. 3-namely Babulal preferred an application dated 04.07.2022 for recall of order dated 14.05.2022 and the same is pending disposal till date and on account of pendency of the application in issue, the petitioners are not getting the fruits of final order dated 14.05.2022 passed in mutation proceedings. In these circumstances, the indulgence of this Court is required. The prayer is to expedite the said pending proceedings.
It is further submitted that though a large number of dates have been fixed, however, for the reasons beyond control, the matter has not yet been decided.
Learned standing counsel submits that he has no objection in case an expedite order is passed.
Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending. Accordingly, in the ends of justice the respondent No.-2 is directed to consider and decide the pending recall application in the Case No. T202204230300406 (Mahendra Kumar and others Versus Smt. Rajpati) most expeditiously, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably within three monthsfrom the next date fixed before it, if there is no other legal impediment in this regard.
It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.8.2023 Jyoti/-