Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1680 of 2020 Petitioner :- Smt. Dropadi Devi Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Shankar Pd Gupta,Suresh Chandra Varma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi,Rajiv Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Sri Shiv Shankar Prasad Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3, Sri S.C. Verma, learned counsel assisted by Sri Rajiv Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for respondents no. 4 and 5 and learned Standing Counsel.
The impugned order dated 9.10.2020 has been passed in compliance of the judgment and order rendered by this Court on 13.9.2019 in Writ B No. 2131 of 2019 (Harish Chand and another Vs. State of U.P. and 7 others). The operative portion of the judgment and order dated 13.9.2019 is reproduced hereunder:
"The matter is remanded back to the deputy Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh to pass fresh order in Recall Application No.504 after recording a finding on the allegation that no notices were issued to the petitioners before passing the order dated 12.8.1996 and the petitioners were not given any opportunity of hearing before passing the said order. The said order shall be passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.
It is clarified that the Court has not adjudicated either on the merits of the case or on the merits of the recall application filed by the petitioners.
With the above directions and observations, the writ petition is allowed."
Pursuant to the remand made by this Court, the respondent No. 1 Deputy Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh has passed the impugned order dated 9.10.2020.
In the impugned order, the Deputy Director of Consolidation has recorded his satisfaction that the service of notice was not sufficient. This finding was returned after perusal of the records including the copy of the notice which was issued. Thereafter the order dated 12.8.96 is referenced and it is found that neither the presence of Surya Bali or his counsel or their arguments have been recorded.
This Court has also perused the order dated 12.8.96. The order dated 12.8.96 is consistent with the findings in the impugned order dated 9.10.2020.
No perversity in the aforesaid findings was pointed out on behalf of the petitioner.
There is no infirmity in the findings of the respondent no. 1, Deputy Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh in the impugned order dated 9.10.2020 that the order dated 12.8.96 was ex parte to the respondent no. 5 Suryabali.
No interference is called for. The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 7.1.2021 Nadeem Ahmad