The provisions of Order XVII Rule 1 (2) C. P. C. and Section 309 (1) Cr. P. C., which mandate day-to-day hearing and speedy disposal of cases, are mandatory and must be strictly adhered to by the Courts.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed for a mandamus direct-ting the Court concerned to decide the suit No. 652 of 1984 Ayodhya Sahai v. Lalji Sahai and Ors. , expeditiously.

( 2 ) WE have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

( 3 ) THE facts of this case disclose a shocking state of affairs. The aforesaid suit was filed as far back as in 1984 for an injunction against the defendants to restrain them from interfering with the possession of the petitioner over the property in dispute and for an injunction not to demolish the Hata or make any construction ever the said land. As stated in the petition, the suit was registered on 13-9-1984 in the trial court, and on 21-2 1985 the Court issue summons to the defendants fixing 23-5-1985 for filing written statement and 30-5-1985 for framing issues services on the defendants was effected and they put in appearance on 30-9-1986 and took two months time to file a written statement. 17-12-1986 was fixed for written statement and issues, as is evident from the order sheet, copy of which is annexure-2 to the writ petition. It has been stated in Paragraph-7 of the writ petition that as yet issues have not been framed in the suit. On 4-4-1997 the petitioner made a representation in the Court concerned for speedy disposal of the suit and enforcement of the temporary injunction order. True copy of the representation dated 4-4-1997 is annexure-3 to the writ petition. On that application the Court concerned fixed 24-7-1997 for objection and disposal, but on 24-7-1997 it has fixed the application for 8-12-1997.

( 4 ) IN paragraph-12 of the writ petition it is alleged that since no attention was paid to the petitioners prayer for speedy disposal of the suit, he filed a miscellaneous application dated 26-5-1997 before respondent No. 1, the District Judge, for a direction to respondent No. 2 for speedy disposal of the suit, True copy of the application dated 26-5-97 is annexure-4 to the writ petition On that application the District Judge passed an order dated 28-5-1997 directing the trial court to pay special attention to the disposal of the case and to see that the defendants do not succeed in adopting delaying tactics True copy of the said order is annexure-5 to the writ petition. However despite this order, the trial court has not paid any heed to it and is not disposing of the suit, hence this writ petition.

( 5 ) THE above facts disclose a lamentable state of affairs. 13 years have passed since the institution of the suit, but as yet even issues have not been framed. What kind of justice is this ?

( 6 ) IN fact a large number of suits, criminal trials and other kind of cases are not being decided expeditiously in this State which is bringing the judiciary into disrepute In our opinion, all suits, criminal trials and other kind of cases must be decided on basis of a time bound programme fixed by the Court at the time of filing of suit or other kind of case, or filing of the charge sheet (in the case of criminal cases) or receipt of the reference order (in labour cases), and the Court must strictly follow this Schedule and both parties shall also be bound by it for only then will the public retain its faith in the judiciary. Justice delayed is justice denied In a large number of cases it has been found by this Court that many of the Judges of the subordinate judiciary are not discharging there duty properly and are not speedily disposing of the cases. It may be pointed out that the proviso of Order XVII Rule 1 (2) of the C. P. C. states : " (a) when the hearing of the suit has commenced, it shall be continued from day-to-day until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined, unless the Court finds that, for the exceptional reasons to be recorded by it, the adjournment of the hearing beyond the following day is necessary. (b) no adjournment shall be granted at the request of a party except where the circumstances are beyond the control of that