Heard Shri Lal Bahadur Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner.
By means of the instant petition the petitioner prays that his suit under Section 229 B of the U.P. Zamidari Abolition and Land Reforms Act pending before the opposite party no.2 be decided expeditiously. In paragraph 3 of the petition it has been specifically averred that the suit was filed on 12.01.1987 and the contesting respondents have filed their written statements on 30.11.1987. It is also averred in the petition that 'gaon sabha' has also filed written statement on 04.01.1988 and despite pleadings having been exchanged no substantial progress has been made. In paragraph 7 it has been averred that large number of dates have been fixed and few extracts of the order sheets have also been brought on record as Annexure-4. Relying upon the same it is stated that more than 33 years have passed and suit is still pending.
It is in view of the aforesaid pleadings, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by means of order dated 17.12.2020 has required the State-respondents to seek instructions as to why the aforesaid suit is pending since last 34 years. Today the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on the basis of written instruction has submitted that petition suffers from gross concealment inasmuch as the suit of the petitioner stood dismissed in default twice. It has also been informed that initially suit was dismissed for want of prosecution on 20.12.1988 thereafter it was restored and again on 05.12.2012 the suit was dismissed in default and since thereafter the matter is pending for disposal of the restoration application and is now fixed on 13.01.2021.
In view of the aforesaid written instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner was confronted as to why the aforesaid fact was concealed and the impression in the petition given is very clear that the suit was pending whereas twice the suit stood dismissed in default and even till today it has not yet been restored.
Learned counsel for the petitioner could not give any cogent explanation. This Court finds that there is an attempt of deliberately concealing the fact. Accordingly, no indulgence can be shown to the petitioner and the petition is dismissed along with cost of Rs.10,000/- which shall be deposited within four weeks with the learned Senior Registrar of this Court and upon depositing the same shall be remitted to the District Legal Aid Authority. A copy of the deposit receipt shall be placed on the record of the OP No.2 by the petitioner and the learned Additional CSC shall place a copy of the order before the OP No.2 to ensure compliance.
After the order was passed the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petition may be permitted to be withdrawn and not pressed. The aforesaid request is rejected.
Order Date :- 6.1.2021 mks