Satynarayan v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition stands disposed of finally
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the aforementioned restoration application, in accordance with law…
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record.
The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief: "(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Additional Commissioner (Administration) Azamgarh Division- Azamgarh (respondent no. 2) to decide the Restoration application No. 961/A Samahru Vs. Sub Divisional Magistrate Sagari, Azamgarh & others, under Rule 4 Order 9 C.P.C./ Section 151 C.P.C. filed in Revision No. 305/2022, (Computer Case No. C202215000000305), Samahru Vs. Sub Divisional Magistrate Sagri, Azamgarh, under Section 210 Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, pending in his court expeditiously preferably within the stipulated period as prescribed by this Hon'ble Court. "
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the aforesaid restoration application is pending since 16.03.2024. It is further contended that several dates have been fixed but the same has not been decided yet. He prayed that the same may be decided, expeditiously.
No useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending.
Operative part
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the aforementioned restoration application, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after ensuring service upon all the opposite parties and giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided that there is no other legal impediment. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Ved Prakash VED PRAKASH SHARMA VED PRAKASH SHARMA VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition stands disposed of finally
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 19 Feb 2025. The bench was MANISH KUMAR NIGAM.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.