Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35831 of 2018 Petitioner :- Hasan Respondent :- District Magistrate And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Madan Lal Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ram Babu Yadav
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Anurag Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Shri Ram Babu Yadav, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha.
The petitioner is before this Court assailing the validity of order dated 15.09.2018 passed by second respondent in Case T-201816670503375 (Report Lekhpal vs. Hasan) under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. Further prayer has been made to command the second respondent not to dispossess the petitioner in respect of Arazi no.191 admeasuring area 1 Biswa situated at Village Manikpur, Tehsil and District Bhadohi.
Shri Anurag Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel as well as Shri Ram Babu Yadav, appearing for the respondents have raised pireliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has got efficacious alternative remedy to file an appeal under Section 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 to assail the validity of order impugned and as such, it is submitted that once the petitioner has got efficacious alternative of filing the appeal, then the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.
The Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and finds substance in the arguments of learned Standing Counsel as admittedly against the impugned order, the petitioner has got efficacious alternative remedy of filing appeal under Section 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 and as such, there is no reason or occasion to intervene in the matter.
In this backdrop, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the proceeding of Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 has been initiated ex-parte against the petitioner and once the petitioner is relegated to the appropriate forum, then in such situation till disposal of the interim application, the interest of petitioner is liable to be protected.
In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of with observation that if the petitioner files an appeal alongwith stay application against the impugned order within 15 days' from today, the Court hopes and trusts that the Appellate Authority will decide the stay application within next three months. Till disposal of the stay application in question, the status qua as of today qua the property in disputed shall be maintained by the parties.
Order Date :- 29.10.2018 A. Pandey