Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 17422 of 2021 Petitioner :- Anil Kumar And 9 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijayendra Pratap Singh,Awadh Narain Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep Singh
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Heard Sri V.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Manvendra Dixit, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for respondent nos. 1,2,3 and 4.
Notice on behalf of respondent No. 5 has been received by Sri Pradeep Singh, learned counsel.
This petition has been filed with the following prayer:-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the representation of respondent No.6 dated 17.8.2020 along with suit No. 76 of 2017 under Section 122(B) of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, pending in the Court of Learned Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District Mirzapur in interest of justice accordance with law".
It appears from the record that the proceedings under Section 122-B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act have been initiated against the petitioners by the respondent No.4. It appears that respondent No.6 has also filed a complaint on 17.8.2020 before the respondent No.3-Tehsildar against the petitioners complaining that they have forcibly and illegally occupied the property of the Gaon Sabha.
The sole contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that two cases may be directed to be connected and heard together by the authority concerned so that two parallel proceedings may not proceed simultaneously.
Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the writ petition stating that in view of the fact that the proceedings under Section 122B are already underway and the respondent no.6 has merely filed a complaint, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief as prayed for by them in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
It appears from the record that the respondent no.6 had filed a petition being Public Interest Petition No. 1693 of 2020 against the State of U.P. and others which was disposed of by means of an order dated 8.1.2021 directing the respondent no.3, Sub-
Divisional Magistrate to decide the representation of the petitioner therein (respondent no.6 herein) as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a copy of the order.
This Court has no reason to doubt that in case, the proceedings in respect of which, the complaint has been filed, and in respect of which, proceeding under Section 122B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act were initiated, would be decided (if not already decided) in accordance with law after considering all relevant issues. As such, no interference in these proceedings is called for.
This petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 sfa/ (Jayant Banerji, J)