Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8062 of 2018 Petitioner :- Geeta Chaturvedi Respondent :- Commissioner Gorakhpur Mandal And 06 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Tariq Maqbool Khan Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.
Heard Sri Arun Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Abhishek Shukla, the learned Standing Counsel.
This writ petition is preferred for seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.1 /Commissioner, Gorakhpur Mandal, Gorakhpur to decide Revision No.C-201705001924 of 2017 (Smt. Geeta Chaturvedi vs. Anil Kumar and others), under Section 229B of U.P.Z.A.&L.R. Act, within a stipulated period.
The learned Standing Counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending, it be disposed of by giving appropriate direction to the authority concerned.
The writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no.1 /Commissioner, Gorakhpur Mandal, Gorakhpur to decide Revision No.C- 201705001924 of 2017 (Smt. Geeta Chaturvedi vs. Anil Kumar and others), under Section 229B of U.P.Z.A.&L.R. Act, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 6 months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that he shall not seek any adjournment and so also is expected from the private opposite parties in the mutation case, except for strong and compelling reasons, else would attract an exemplary cost of not less than Rs.250/- payable to the other side.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that he shall not seek any adjournment and so also is expected from the private opposite parties in the mutation case, except for strong and compelling reasons, else would attract an exemplary cost of not less than Rs.250/- payable to the other side.
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 :- 28.2.2018 RS