Though the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on 1st of November, 2007 the case was dismissed by Board of Revenue and thereafter, the petitioners moved application for restoration along with application for substitution of legal heirs of revisionist, but since the application for restoration was not allowed, there was no reason to entertain the application for substitution. However, ultimately this Court by means of order dated 6th of January, 2010 passed in Writ Petition No. 6477 (M/S) of 2009 allowed the application for restoration. The Board of Revenue allowed the application for substitution with the cost of Rs. 5,000/-, whereas petitioners were not at fault.
Considering the aforesaid facts, I hereby quash the order impugned dated 6th of September, 2010 passed by the Board of Revenue so far as it relates to imposition of cost of Rs. 5,000/- .
In the aforesaid terms, writ petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 14.9.2010 Amit