Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19613 of 2018 Petitioner :- Munarak Respondent :- Additional District Magistrate And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prahlad Kumar Bhardwaj Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ramesh Chandra Upadhyay
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Rajesh Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent and Shri R.C. Upadhayay, learned counsel appearing for the Land Management Committee.
Petitioner is before this Court with the request to ask the Additional Collector/Additional Collector (Finance and Revenue), Azamgarh to decide the restoration application no.248 pending in Suit no.542 (Munni Lal vs. Jogi and others).
Record in question reflects that against the order dated 08.07.2004 passed by Additional District Magistrate, Azamgarh under Section 198(4) of UPZA&LR Act 1950, the petitioner has preferred Revision no.62/144/238/A of 2004-06 (Munarak vs. Gaon Sabha and others) under Section 333 of UPZA&LR Act 1950 and the same was allowed by judgement and order dated 06.07.2006 setting aside the order dated 08.07.2004 and the matter was remanded back to the Additional District Magistrate, Azamgarh to decide the same on merit after adducing the evidence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, in this backdrop, states that the said proceeding under Section 198(4) of UPZA&LR Act has been restored but thereafter the matter was dismissed for non prosecution and as such, it has been prayed that the restoration application, which has been filed by the petitioner may be decided expeditiously.
This Court has the occasion to peruse the record in question and finds that admittedly vide order dated 06.07.2006, the revision in question has been allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Authority concerned to decide the same afresh. It has been alleged that thereafter the said proceeding under Section 198(4) UPZA&LR Act has been turned down on the ground of default but nothing has been brought on record to substantiate the said claim.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is of the considered opinion that once the matter has been remitted back to the Revisional Authority, then in such a situation, the proceeding under Section 198(4) UPZA&LR Act has to be finalized expeditiously on the merit of the case and as such, this Court proceeds to ask the Additional District Magistrate, Azamgarh to look into the grievance of the petitioner and in case the aforesaid proceeding under Section 198(4) UPZA&LR Act was dismissed for non prosecution, then the same may be treated as restored itself and the matter is liable to be decided on the merit of the case expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 28.5.2018 A. Pandey