Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11299 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ram Nain And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anup Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.
Heard Sri Anup Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Rajesh Kumar, the learned Standing Counsel.
This writ petition is preferred for seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2/Joint Magistrate/UP Ziladhikari, Sadar, Gorakhpur, to decide Suit no. T-20140531032247/4.3.2014, (Ram Nain and others vs.Raja Ram 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.2/Joint Magistrate/UP Ziladhikari, Sadar, Gorakhpur, to decide Suit no. T- 20140531032247/4.3.2014, (Ram Nain and others vs.Raja Ram and others) under Section 229B of U.P.Z.A.&L.R. Act, 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, without granting any frivolous adjournments.
Adjournments, if any, shall be 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 RS