THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL. Writ Petition (M/S) No. 548 of 2006 Urmila Mittal, W/O Ashwini Kumar Mittal, R/O Nath House, Devpura, Tehsil Haridwar, District Haridwar. ... Petitioner. Versus 1. Tehsildar, Hridwar, District Haridwar. 2. Mahendra Pratap Singh Gill, S/O Late Ram Singh, R/O Jwalapur, District Hridwar. 3. Sohan Singh, R/O Ranipur Jhal, Police Station Ranipur, District Haridwar. ... Respondents. Sri Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Nand Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 1. Dated May 12, 2006. Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. By means of this writ petition the petitioner prays for issue of an order or direction directing the respondent no.1 to conclude the mutation proceedings of Case No. 464 of 2003 under Sections 34/35 of the Land Revenue Act Urmila Devi Vs. Mahendra Pratap Singh, pending disposal in that court, expeditiously. According to the petitioner, a Mutation Case No. 464 of 2003 under Sections 34/35 of the Land Revenue Act is pending for disposal before the Tehsildar concerned and the petitioner is suffering irreparable loss as she had invested more than Rupees one Crore for purchase of the land is question. According to the petitioner, she as well as witness Rohtash Singh could not be cross- examined on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 because of frequent adjournments sought for by them. Admittedly, the mutation proceedings are pending disposal since the year 2003 and according to her, due to delay tactics being adopted by respondent no.2, the mutation proceedings could not be concluded. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case particularly the fact that mutation proceedings are pending for disposal since the year 2003, which are summary in nature, it a fit case in which direction for time bound disposal of the proceedings may be issued. The respondent no.1 Tehsildar Haridwar is directed to decide the mutation proceedings under Sections 34/35 of U.P. Land Revenue Act in aforesaid case no. 463 of 2003, Urmila Devi Vs. Mahendra Pratap Singh, pending disposal before him, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order before respondent no.1. Both the parties to the proceedings shall co-operate in the expeditious disposal of the mutation proceedings. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (B.S.Verma, J.) RCP