Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Hari Bajan vs Addl. Commissioner (Admin.) Devi ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|17 December, 2019

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner appears and files the certified copy of the ordersheet pursuant to the order of the Court dated 16.12.2019, which is taken on record.
The direction is sought against the State instrumentality with regard to the matter pending in the Revenue court but the State, though being a necessary party, is not impleaded. The copy of the writ petition has already been received in the office of learned CSC. Learned Standing Counsel Dr. Krishna Singh for the State is present.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to implead and add in the array of opposite parties 'The State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Revenue, Government of U.P, Secretariat Lucknow'. The amendment may be made across the day.
In view of the proposed order, the private opposite parties nos. 3 to 7 need not to be served and service of notice upon them is dispensed with.
The matter, as pleaded in the writ petition, shows that a boundary dispute is pending under Section 41 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act before the SDO, Sadar, Gonda which though once allowed on 11.01.2016 but thereafter the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Devi Patan, Division, Gonda vide dated 01.02.2016 admitted the revision and stayed the order under revision, therefore, with the pendency of the aforesaid revision, the boundary dispute remains unsettled till date.
Since pendency of the boundary dispute in between the parties to the revision for a long period not only makes effectious to the parties but also this is onerous of the Revenue Department, therefore, pendency of the revision for such a long period before opposite party no. 1 seems unjustified.
Perusal of typed copy of the ordersheet, annexed with the writ petition and certified copy of the ordersheet filed today, makes it clear that revision is admitted but confirms the position that without any just and reasonable cause, the revision is being lingered and undisposed of.
Learned Standing Counsel would have no objection if a direction as to the expeditious disposal of the revision is issued to the court concerned.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, opposite party no. 1-Addl. Commissioner (Administration), Devi Patan Division, Gonda is directed to get decided as early as possible the Revision no. C201608000088 (Jag Prasad and Others Vs. Hari Bajan and Others), under Section 219 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties to the revision, considering all the facts and materials available on record, in accordance with the provisions of law within a reasonable period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before him.
With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 kkv/
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Hari Bajan vs Addl. Commissioner (Admin.) Devi ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
17 December, 2019
Judges
  • Vikas Kunvar Srivastav