Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19719 of 2018 Petitioner :- Nanhe Respondent :- General Manager And 18 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhakar Singh,Arun Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amresh Singh,Vikash Chandra Tripathi
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri V.C. Tripathi, Advocate for the first, second and fifth respondents and Shri Amresh Singh, learned counsel for fourth respondent.
Notice need not be issued to the private respondents in view of the order proposed to be passed.
Petitioner is before this Court assailing the validity of orders impugned dated 24.04.2018, 21.06.2004 passed by Additional Commissioner, Bareilly Mandal, Bareilly in the proceeding under Section 331 of UPZA&LR Act as well as the order dated 07.06.1999 and 21.08.1995 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Baheri, District Bareilly in the proceeding under Section 229-B UPZA&LR Act.
Record in question reflects that the revision filed by the petitioner under Section 331 of UPZA&LR Act has been dismissed for non prosecution on 21.06.2004 and thereafter the restoration application has also been dismissed for non prosecution vide order dated 24.04.2018.
Shri V.C. Tripathi, Advocate informed to the Court that so far as the title and claim of petitioner over the property in question is concerned, with regard to the same the petitioner has already filed injunction suit and the same is pending consideration before the Court below and once the petitioner has already filed suit for crystallization of his rights over the property in dispute, then this Court may not interfere in the matter.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that once the petitioner has already availed the common law remedy and proceeded to file injunction suit before the Court below for crystallization of his claim over the property in question, then there is no occasion or reason for this Court to interfere with the orders impugned.
Writ petition is dismissed accordingly. However dismissal of the present writ petition would not at all come in the way of petitioner to agitate his claim before the Court below.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 A. Pandey