Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2282 of 2019 Petitioner :- Birendra Kumar And 6 Others Respondent :- Board Of Revenue U.P. At Allahabad And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajiv Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anuj Kumar
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Case called on. No one appears on behalf of the petitioners. Sri Anuj Kumar Advocate, is present on behalf of respondent Nos. 4 and 5, Gram Panchayat Shivrampur and Gram Panchayat Pathraudi, Tehsil Karwi, District Chitrakoot and Sri Ajit Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3.
This writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief and no other:
"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus/directing the respondent No.1 to decide the revision filed by respondent No.6 bearing Revision No.2119 of 2018 (Baij Nath Vs. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Karwi, District Chitrakoot) under Section 333 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act within specified period which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper."
The case of the petitioner is that against an order dated 22.09.2017 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Karwi, District Chitrakoot, in proceedings for preparation of the final decree under Section 176 U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, accepting the report of the Lekhpal regarding drawing of lots, respondent No.6 filed a Revision before the Board of Revenue, under Section 333 U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The Board granted an interim order restraining dispossession and further summoned records of the trial. The grievance of the petitioner is that carrying the matter against an interlocutory order in Revision to the Board, respondent No.6 has got the proceedings of the partition suit held up, which are lingering on before the Board. The Revision was admitted to hearing on 11.09.2018. Thereafter, the Revision has been adjourned either by fixing general dates or on request for adjournment made by the other side. Mostly, it has been adjourned by the Board fixing general dates or adjourning the matter itself. The interim order, at the same time, is being perpetuated. It is also pointed out that the Revision is one from an interlocutory order, which can be conveniently disposed of at an early date.
Looking to the order that this Court proposes to pass, no notice is being issued to the private respondents, as no rights of parties are being determined here. However, in case the sixth respondent is aggrieved by the order passed by this Court, he may make an application in the decided matter.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad, where Revision No.2119 of 2018 Baij Nath Vs. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Karwi, District Chitrakoot, under Section 333 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms, Act is pending, are ordered to decide the said Revision within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, in accordance with law after hearing all parties concerned.
This writ petition is allowed in terms of the aforesaid orders. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 NSC