Allahabad High Court
A227/6963/2025 of TIRBHUWAN NATH PANDEY Vs COMMISSIONER, FAIZABAD, AYODHYA DIVISION, FAIZABAD, AYODHYA, AND OTHERS on 3 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6963 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Prashant Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed,
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6963 of 2025
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Sri Prashant Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent.
2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, requirement of issuance of notice to private respondents is dispensed with.
3. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for direction to the respondent No. 1 - Commissioner, Faizabad (Ayodhya) Division, Faizabad (Ayodhya), to decide Recall Application filed in Appeal No. 108 of 1999 - Sitaram Vs. Kamta Prasad and Others, U/S 331(3) of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, expeditiously.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently met in case respondent no. 1 - Commissioner, Faizabad (Ayodhya) Division, Faizabad (Ayodhya), considers and decides the aforesaid case in the time bound manner.
5. Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the aforesaid prayer.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits of the case, respondent no. 1 - Commissioner, Faizabad (Ayodhya) Division, Faizabad (Ayodhya), is directed to decide Recall Application filed in Appeal No. 108 of 1999 - Sitaram Vs. Kamta Prasad and Others, U/S 331(3) of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, expeditiously, say within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.
7. It is further directed that the parties to the case shall cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment, neither any such adjournment shall be granted by the Court concerned, except in exceptional circumstances.
8. With above observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
December 3, 2025 A. Verma Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Prashant Yadav, Pramod Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohan Singh (Alok Mathur,J.) Tirbhuwan Nath Pandey .....Petitioner(s) Commissioner, Faizabad, Ayodhya Division, Faizabad, Ayodhya, And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench