Allahabad High Court
RINKU YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The Court directed the Consolidation Officer to decide the pending case within twelve months and disposed of the writ petition.
Summary
Petitioner Rinku Yadav filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Consolidation Officer (Respondent No.3) to decide Case No. 1197 of 2025 under Section 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation Act, 1953. The petitioner argued that the case was ready for final adjudication but remained pending. The Standing Counsel for the respondents indicated that the objection would be decided soon and raised no objection to a direction for expeditious disposal. The Court held that there was no useful purpose in keeping the matter pending and ordered the Consolidation Officer to decide the case within twelve months, issuing a reasoned order after hearing the parties, without unnecessary adjournments. The writ petition was consequently disposed of without any comment on the merits of the underlying case.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the Consolidation Officer to decide the pending case under Section 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation Act, 1953.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Consolidation Act, 1953 — s. 12
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- Uttar Pradesh Consolidation Act
- Section 12
- Consolidation Officer
- expeditious disposal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - B No. - 156 of 2026
Rinku Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shiv Chand Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 54
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today in Court is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and
perused the record.
3. The instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following
reliefs:-
" Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding to direct the respondent no. 3 to decide the Case No. 1197
of 2025 Computerized No. T20255415657031197 (Rinku Yadav Vs.
Satiram and others) under Section 12 of Uttar Pradesh Consolidation
Act 1953."
4. It is submitted that in pursuance of the order dated 30.04.2025 passed by
Settlement Officer of Consolidation, proceeding under Section 12 of the
U.P.CH. Act is pending consideration despite the fact that both the parties
are already appeared and case is ready for final adjudication.
5. Learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of the instructions, submits that
the objection will be decided very soon. He further submits that he has no
objection, if a direction is issued to decide the aforesaid case, expeditiously.
6. In this conspectus as above, no useful purpose would be served to keep
this matter pending, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to finally
dispose of the present writ petition, without making any observation on the
WRIB No. 156 of 2026
2
merits of the case, as mentioned in the writ petition, with a direction to
Consolidation Officer, Phoolpur, District-Azamgarh (Respondent no.3) to
decide the aforesaid case strictly in accordance with law, by means of a
reasoned and speaking order, after affording opportunity of hearing to the
parties concerned and without granting any unnecessary adjournments to
either of the parties expeditiously, preferably, within a period of twelve
months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
7. With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
March 19, 2026
Neetu
Digitally signed by :-
NEETU SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…