Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1256 of 2021
Petitioner :- Brij Bala
Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sangam Lal Kesharwani,A.P.Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kaushal Kishore Mani
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kaushal Kishore Mani, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha (respondent No.2) and learned Standing Counsel representing respondent No.1.
In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the order proposed to be passed hereunder, this Court is proceeding to finally decide this matter at the admission stage with the consent of counsels present, without putting notice to the respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 and without calling for their respective affidavits, i.e. counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit, with a liberty to the respondents to move a recall application, in case, any fact is found incorrect.
Petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the following prayers:
"a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned order dated 20.07.2021 (Contained as annexure No.1 to the writ petition) passed by the Deputy Director of consolidation, Saharanpur in Revision No.221/189/Computer Case No.2020530960000085 (Satpal Vs. Mitrapal and others) under Section 48(1) of U.P. Consolidation and Holdings Act and further be pleased to direct the parties to maintain status quo during pendency of revision before Deputy Director of consolidation, Saharanpur.
b)Issue appropriate order or direction commanding the Deputy Director of consolidation, Saharanpur to decide the Revision No.221/189/2020530960000085 (Satpal Vs. Mitrapal and others) under Section 48 (1) of U.P. consolidation and Holdings Act and till the decision of the Revision Status quo be maintained by the parties.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the interim order dated 19.12.2019 was vacated ex-parte without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, on the date of application dated 20.07.2021 moved by D.G.C. (R) on behalf of Gaon Sabha, which is blatant violation of natural justice.
Record reveals that revision, pending before Deputy Director of Consolidation, Saharanpur (in brevity D.D.C.) is arising out of chak allotment proceeding. Initially three revisions were decided by common order dated 16.08.2019 (Annexure No.4). Feeling aggrieved by the same, present petitioner has moved restoration application against the order dated 16.08.2019, which was allowed vide order dated 20.07.2020 (Annexure No.9) and the revisions were restored to its original number. It is also pointed out that during the aforesaid period a reference proceeding was also initiated on 20.09.2019, which was culminated vide order dated 26.09.2019 passed by D.D.C. Against the said order, petitioner has field restoration application, as well, which was allowed vide order dated 20.07.2020.
During pendency of the revision, after restoration order dated 20.07.2020, an interim order was passed for maintaining status quo on the application moved by the petitioner. Aforesaid interim order was extended time to time. Lastly, it was ordered to be extended till 31.08.2021. It appears that before 31.08.2021, an application for stay vacation has been moved on 20.07.2021 for vacating the earlier stay order date 19.12.2019, which was allowed ex-parte on the same day.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 20.07.2021 was passed behind the back of petitioner without affording her opportunity of hearing. Taking the benefit of impugned order, State authorities are trying to disposses the petitioner.
Per contra, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha submits that property in question is public utility land and because of interim order inconvenience is causing to the public, which has rightly been vacated.
It is evident that impugned order dated 20.07.2021 has been passed behind the back of the petitioner without affording her opportunity of hearing. There is nothing on record to show that any notice was issued to the petitioner or she has been heard before passing the order dated 20.07.2021. The application dated 20.07.2021 itself evident that it was moved and entertained by the Court prior to the forthcoming date fixed i.e. 31.08.2021.
Learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha, states that he has no instructions as to whether the present petitioner was heard before passing order dated 20.07.2021 or not.
From the perusal of the impugned order, it reveals that it has been passed behind the back of the petitioner without affording her opportunity of hearing, that too prior to the forthcoming date fixed i.e. 31.08.2021, which is not sustainable in the eye of law. Even otherwise, during pendence of lis at revisional stage, interim order granted earlier should not be discontinued to avoid the civil and legal complications relating to the property in question.
In the matter of Ali Sher Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2007
(102) R.D. 498, Co-ordinate Bench of this Court held that once an appeal or revision is entertained by a higher Court, Stay normally should be granted to avoid swinging pendulum. Para 4
of judgment is quoted below:
"It is well settled that once an appeal or revision is entertained by a higher Court against an order having civil consequences stay normally should be granted to avoid swinging pendulum unless the Court for the reasons to be recorded finds that there is no case for grant of stay as observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mool Chand v. Raza Buland Sugar Industries (1982 (3) SCC 484)".
In this conspectus as above, order dated 20.07.2021 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation is hereby quashed and accordingly, the present petition is allowed. Interim order dated 19.12.2019 shall remain oprative till the pendency of revision.
However, the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Saharanpur is hereby directed to decide the revisions pending in its court expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three months from the production of copy of this order.
It is expected that it should be decided by reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned without granting unnecessary adjournments.
The petitioner shall file a computer generated copy of this order supported by an affidavit, which shall be verified by the concerned authority from the website of the High Court, Allahabad.
Order Date :- 12.8.2021 Pr/-