Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19916 of 2018 Petitioner :- Hajari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Irfan Ali,Ajay Prakash Paul Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashish Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. Shri Ashish Kumar Srivastava appears for Gaon Sabha.
In view of the order proposed to be passed, notices need not go to private respondents.
The petitioner being a complainant is aggrieved by order dated 13.3.2018 passed in Revision No.123/05-06 (Maharaj Singh & Ors. v. Land Management Committee & Ors.) under Section 333 UPZA & LR Act.
The record in question reflects that the petitioner had filed complaint against the private respondents and the proceeding has been initiated against them under Section 198 (4) of UPZA & LR Act and the same had been finalised exparte. Finally the matter reached to revisional court and the revisional court was of the considered opinion that entire proceeding was exparte and after according opportunity the matter is liable to be decided by the Collector, Mathura.
Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel for Gaon Sabha have vehemently opposed the writ petition and submitted that the status of the petitioner is merely a complainant and once he has made complaint and cognizance has been taken by the authority concerned, proceeding has been finalised and once the revisional authority was of the opinion that the private respondents against whom allegations were levelled had also certain valuable right/ stake in the claim and they may also be heard in the matter, then there is no infirmity or illegality in the order impugned and no interference is required in the matter.
Confronted with this, learned counsel for the petitioner states that proceeding under Section 198 (4) of UPZA & LR Act is pending consideration since 2006 and the same may be directed to be decided expeditiously.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Court is not inclined to interfere in the order impugned, however, in the interest of justice in case any such proceeding under Section 198 (4) is pending consideration, the same is liable to be decided expeditiously.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 SP/