Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14603 of 2019 Petitioner :- Naresh Nishad @ Ramnaresh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Baijant Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Tariq Maqbool Khan
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
This writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief:-
"(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to directing respondent no. 3/S.D.M. to decide the case No. 03778/2018 (Computer No. T201805440303778), case No.
01652/2018 (Computer No. T201805440301652) and case No. 3780/2018 (Computer No. T201805440303780) (under section 67) of U.R. Revenue Code, 2006, which is pending before the Respondent no. 3 within stipulated period as fixed by the Hon'ble Court."
It has been stated that three cases under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code are pending consideration since the year 2013 and have not been decided finally. The petitioner claims to be the complainant of these three cases.
However perusal of the order sheet reveals that the matters have been consistently and repeatedly adjourned on account of lawyers being on strike. It is therefore clear that there is no fault on the part of the court, in case, the matters have remained pending.
A mandamus is liable to be issued only when a statutory duty is not being performed despite a demand in this regard having been made in writing.
Since the lawyers have remained on strike, it cannot be said that the court concerned has not performed its statutory duty.
However, the writ petition is disposed of with the observation that the court concerned may endeavour to decide the three cases as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties.
It is however clarified that in case the lawyers continue to remain on strike, the court concerned is not required to comply with the directions contained in this orders.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Mayank