Smt. Yashoda vs Collector and Others

Anjani Kumar Mishra, J.—This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 8.11.2013 passed in Revision No. 8/13-14 u/s 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act whereby the revision of the petitioner has been dismissed and the parties have been directed to appear before the Tahsildar on 25.11.2013. Since the matter pertains to mutation, I am not entering into the merits of the writ petition and deem it to be a fit case for a direction for disposal of the mutation case expeditiously preferably within a period of two months of production of a certified copy of this order before the Court below.

At this juncture learned Counsel for the petitioner states that earlier proceedings were decided by the Tahsildar, Maharajganj district Rai Bareilly. Prior to the decision, a transfer application was filed and even though the Tahsildar was informed about the pendency of the transfer case yet the Tahsildar had proceeded to decide the case on merits.

Under the circumstances of the case learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that if the same Tahsildar is asked to decide the matter it may prejudice the case of the petitioner.

Learned Counsel for the respondent has no objection in case the matter is transferred to some other Court. He is also interested in expeditious disposal of the mutation case itself as stated by him.

Accordingly the parties agree that the proceedings may be heard by the Tahsildar, Sadar, Rai Bareilly.

Under the circumstances this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 1 to transfer the mutation case No. 53/56/69/99 u/s 34, U.P. Land Revenue Act Yashoda v. Ram Prasad from the Court of Tahsildar, Maharajganj, Rai Bareilly to the Court of Tahsildar, Sadar, Rai Bareilly or to any other Court.

It is further directed that the opposite party No. 1 shall ensure that the record is received by the transferee Court within a period of two weeks from today. The transferee Court will thereafter proceed to hear the matter after taking evidence of the parties and decide the same within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the record.

This order has been passed with the consent of the parties appearing before this Court. The respondent No. 3 is not represented. However, in case she feels aggrieved, it will be open to her to file a recall application. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.