Allahabad High Court
Haider Ali Kazim Alias Asad Kazim vs Mohammad Iqbal Mahmood Kazim And 5 ... on 25 January, 2021
Author: Vivek Kumar Birla
Bench: Vivek Kumar Birla
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 608 of 2021 Petitioner :- Haider Ali Kazim Alias Asad Kazim Respondent :- Mohammad Iqbal Mahmood Kazim And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Javed Husain Khan,Gulrez Khan,Sr. Advocate Sri W.H. Khan Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents and perused the record.
Present petition has been filed with following prayers:-
"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 to decide the case no. 134/ 155 of 2012 under section 229-B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act Mohd. Iqbal Mahmood Kazim and others pending in the court of respondent no.2 very expeditiously within shortest time fixed by the court."
On the earlier occasion also the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing writ petition being Writ- C No. 48671 of 2015, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 28.8.2015, the same is quoted as under:-
"This writ petition has been filed seeking the following among other reliefs.
"i) Issue, a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 to decide the case no. 134/155 of 2012 under Section 229-B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act Mohd. Iqbal Mahmood Kazim and others pending in the court of respondent no. 2 very expeditiously within shortest time fixed by the court."
Shri W.H. Khan, learned Senior Advocate, states that pleadings have been exchanged and the Court is not now required to frame issues and thereafter decide the matter on the basis of evidence that may be adduced by by the parties. The suit under Section 229-B of the UP Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act has been instituted in the year 2012.
However, the writ petition is disposed of with the observation that the trial court may consider and decide the case as expeditiously as possible keeping in mind the pendency of cases before him. "
Second petition for the same relief is not maintainable, however, the above quoted order clearly reflects that no time frame was fixed in the order. The allegation is that for this reason the other concerned party is lingering on the matter on one ground or other.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is finally disposed of with the direction to the respondent no. 2, Sub Divisional Officer/ Assistant Collector, District- Kaushambi to expedite the hearing of the aforesaid case and decide the same on its own merit, in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within a period of nine months from the date of production of self- attested copy of this order, provided there is no legal impediment and no unnecessary adjournments shall be granted to the parties and provided the functioning of the court concerned is not affected due to any reason related to COVID- 19 Pandemic as well as the lawyers are not abstaining from judicial work.
With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the present petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 25.1.2021 Aditya