Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11125 of 2018 Petitioner :- Krishna Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 02 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramagya Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.
Heard Sri Ramagya Shukla, 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 respondent no.2 / Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil- Meja, Allahabad to decide Suit no. 132/206/582 of 2016 (Parwati Devi Vs. Om Prakash and others) under Section 34/35 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901, 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.2 / Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil- Meja, Allahabad to decide Suit no. 132/206/582 of 2016 (Parwati Devi Vs. Om Prakash and others) under Section 34/35 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901, as expeditiously as possible, keeping in view the observations of this Court made in Writ-C No. 6635 of 2012 (Chandra Bali Vs. Addl. Commissioner and others) decided on 7.2.2012.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that he shall not seek any adjournment and so also is expected from the private respondents, 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 :- 28.3.2018 N.S.Rathour