Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
From the records of the present writ petition this Court finds that the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur has refused to exercise revisional jurisdiction on a revision filed under Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act by the petitioner, after recording that in suit filed under Section 229B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, an application for recall has been filed which is pending and during the pendency of the said recall application, an interim injunction has been granted by the concerned court, which continues to be in operative even today. It has been held that interference with the mutation effected having regard to the interim order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in regular suit under Section 229B of the Act is not called for.
Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and having examined the records of the present writ petition, I am of the considered opinion that there is no illegality in the order passed by the Additional Commissioner so as to warrant any interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The proper remedy available to the petitioner is to get the interim order passed in Suit No. 66/72/106 vacated and if so advised, to seek such further protection as may be necessary in the said suit itself.
However, in the facts of the present case it would be appropriate that the restoration application be decided at the earliest possible so that the rights of the parties may crystallize. Accordingly, it is provided that the restoration application filed in the suit be considered and decided at the earliest possible preferably within two months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before the court concerned.
The present writ petition is disposed of subject to the observations made above.
Order Date :- 22.1.2010 Sushil/-