Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
AJAY BHANOT, J.
Ram Dhani and Another – Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Writ (C) No. 12016 of 2020
Decided On : 18-12-2020
Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 - Section 116 -To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the Suits under Section 116 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, within stipulated period which may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court -order-sheet shows that the dates were granted mechanically. No effective hearing whatsoever took place for almost two years since the institution of the proceedings
Finding of the Court:
legislative mandate of Section 116 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016 has not been implemented. The stakeholders have shown apathy towards the litigant, and indifference to the noble charter of the legal profession. Honest endeavours and earnest efforts to conclude the proceedings with diligence and dispatch are not disclosed from the order-sheet. No reasons for failing to decide as required under Rule 110(10) are in the order-sheet. The order-sheet of the case is equally a reflection and an indictment of the judicial process. The court has ample powers to ensure that the process of law is not stalled by the dilatory tactics of any party. The courts are not helpless and cannot be seen to be helpless.- Authority/learned court below has failed to perform its statutory duty. In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court has to issue a mandamus commanding the authority/learned court below to discharge its statutory duty -Authority/learned court below has failed to perform its statutory duty. In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court has to issue a mandamus commanding the authority/learned court below to discharge its statutory duty.
Result: writ petition is disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
AJAY BHANOT, J.
1. Heard Sri. Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri. Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.
2. The petitioners have prayed for the following prayer in the instant writ petition:
3. The petitioners instituted proceeding under Section 116 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 before the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pindara, District Varanasi, which was registered as Suit No. 429/1125 of 2017 (Ram Sanehy and Others vs. Lalman and Others). The suit was instituted for division of holdings of which the petitioners claim to be co-sharers.
4. The order-sheet is appended to the writ petition as Annexure-4. The order-sheet records the following dates in the proceedings, namely, 16.04.2018, 10.05.2018, 21.06.2018, 23.07.2018, 24.08.2018, 14.09.2018, 15.10.2018, 14.11.2018, 05.12.2018, 27.12.2018, 29.01.2019, 01.05.2019, 06.06.2019, 01.07.2019, 18.07.2019, 04.09.2019, 17.10.2019, 18.11.2019, 27.11.2019, 13.12.2019, 03.01.2020, 20.06.2020 and 04.07.2020. However, a perusal of the order-sheet shows that the dates were granted mechanically. No effective hearing whatsoever took place for almost two years since the institution of the proceedings. The first effective hearing happened when the order dated 08.06.2020 was passed by the respondent No. 2 learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Judicial), Tehsil Pindra, District Varanasi. The matter thus remains pending before the respondent No. 2-learned Sub- Divisional Magistrate (Judicial), Tehsil Pindra, District Varanasi. The proceedings have not moved forward thereafter. Hence, the writ petition.
5. The proceedings in a suit for division of holdings is controlled and guided by the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 read with Rules framed thereunder.
6. Sections 116 and 117 provide the statutory backdrop for a suit for division of holdings. The provisions of Sections 116 and 117 are reproduced hereunder:
(2) In every such suit, the Court may also divide the trees, wells and other improvements existing on such holding but where such division is not possible, the trees, wells and other improvements aforesaid and valuation thereof shall be divided and adjusted in the manner prescribed.
(3) One suit may be instituted for the division of more holdings than one where all the parties to the suit other than the [Gram Panchayat] are jointly interested in each of the holdings.
(4) To every suit under this section, the [Gram Panchayat] concerned shall be made a party.
117. Duty of Court in suits for division of holding - (1) In every suit for division of holding under Section 116 the Court of Assistant Collector shall:
(a) follow such procedure as may be prescribed.
(b) apportion the land revenue payable in respect of each such division.
(2) A division of holding referred to in Section 116 shall not affect the joint liability of the tenure-holders there of in respect of the land revenue payable before the date of the final decree.”
7. The relevant Rules material to the controversy provide for the procedure and the time-line for conclusion of the proceedings are Rules 108 and 109 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016. The said Rules are extracted hereunder:
109. Preliminary and Final decrees (Section 117) - (1) If the plai
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
