No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11593 of 2018 Petitioner :- Gangadhar Respondent :- Naib Tehsildar And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhanshu Pratap Singh,Amit Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel.
It is urged that appropriate direction be issued to respondent no.1 to decide Case No.809/2017 (Computer No.T2017176577031837), (Gangadhar vs. Shiv Poojan), under Section 34 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R Act, within a stipulated period.
Learned standing counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served by keeping this petition pending, it be disposed of by giving appropriate direction to the respondent concerned.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent concerned to decide the aforesaid case, as expeditiously as possible, in the light of the decision of this Court in Writ-C No.6635/2012 (Chandra Bali vs. Addl. Commissioner and other), decided on 7.2.2012. It is made clear that the respondent concerned would not grant unnecessary adjournments, adjournments if any, shall be for strong and compelling reasons, else would attract cost of Rs.250/-, to be paid to the other side.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes not to seek any frivolous adjournment before the respondent concerned.
It is clarified that the proceedings as far as possible should not be repeatedly adjourned, merely on the ground that the Presiding Officer is busy in administrative work.
Order Date :- 30.3.2018 Chandra