Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 4164 of 2018 Petitioner :- Kusum Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 48 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashi Bhushan Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mahesh Narain Singh
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J.
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition with the following prayer:-
"a) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the court below to decide the Civil Revision No. 39 of 2006-07, Om Prakash and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, filed under section 333 of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act and pending before Board of Revenue U.P. at Allahabad (respondent no.2).
Issue with regard to right of the petitioner to get a writ of mandamus issued to the subordinate courts or the authorities to expedite the matter fell for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ali Shad Usmani and others Vs. Ali Isteba and others, 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB). The Court has opined in the following terms:-
"2. We are not inclined to issue a direction for the expeditious hearing of a Civil Suit which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), District- Azamgarh. It would be most inappropriate to Court to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 and/or under Article 227 of the Constitution simply for the purpose of expediting the hearing of a suit. Such orders, if granted, place a class of litigants, who move the Court in a separate and preferential category whereas other cases which may be of similar or greater antiquity and urgency are left to be decided in the normal channel. Hence, any such direction may be issued with the greatest care and circumspection by the High Court otherwise the Civil Courts will be overburdened only with requests for expeditious disposal of suits, which have been expedited by the High Court. Most of the litigants cannot afford the expense of moving the High Court and would not, therefore, be in a position to have the benefit of such an order.
3. Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been made out. We emphasize that there may be other cases such as involving senior citizens, those who are differently abled or people suffering from a particular disability socio-economic or otherwise which may prime cause of urgent disposal.
It is for the learned Trial Judge in each case to apply his or her mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be expedited."
Applying the aforesaid principle of law, I find that the present petition lacks merit. However, it is open to the petitioner to move appropriate application for expediting the proceedings in the aforesaid revision, which shall be considered and decided by the court below expeditiously in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.5.2018 Ram Murti