Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Copy of the writ petition is received in the office of learned CSC. Learned Addl. CSC for the State is present to respond the writ petition.
Opposite party no. 3 is a private party, however in view of the proposed order, there is no necessity to issue notice to opposite party no. 3 and service of notice upon him is dispensed with.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a dispute with regard to Chak No. 162, situated at Village Naseerabad, Post Office Manikpur Jalalpur, Pargana Bidhar, Tehsil Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar. In the year 2015, the petitioner when got 'Khatauni' from the Tehsil, then it reveals that an entry is made on it by order of Up-Ziladhikari, Tanda, dated 22.06.2015 in Case No. T-2015040403188 (Lalji Vs. State of U.P.), under Sections 33/39 of the UPZA & LR. Act with regard to aforesaid Khata number. Therefore, he moved a restoration application to recall the order dated 22.06.2015. Unfortunately, in the absence of the parties to the proceeding, the restoration application was dismissed vide order dated 09.04.2018 in default of the appearance. The petitioner again moved a recall application bearing no. T-201604040303376 on 30.08.2019 before Up-Ziladhikari, Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar, arrayed as opposite party no. 2 in this petition, which is still pending undisposed off.
Since Section 201 of the Land Revenue Act provides that against any such order which is passed ex-parte or without hearing of the parties, there is no necessity to move for appeal against that order but the same can be heard at the instance of the defaulting party if he explains the reasons for his absence satisfactorily, as such, the authority, who in the absence of both the parties has dismissed the first restoration application with regard to entry in the 'Khatauni', has bounden duty to dispose of the restoration application which is moved to restore the first restoration application filed to recall the ex-parte order passed in 'Khatauni'.
Keeping pending a dispute for infinite is not good without reaching at a conclusion. Where entry in the khatauni was earlier ordered, but if the restoration application has any substance to be allowed, the pendency of such application is not only vexatious to the parties but also onerous to the Revenue Department. Therefore learned Addl. CSC for the State would have no objection, if any such direction is issued to the concerned court for disposal of the matter expeditiously within reasonable time.
In the aforesaid circumstances, opposite party no. 2-Up Ziladhikari, Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar is directed to dispose of not only the second restoration application but first one also after hearing the parties in accordance with law as sooner as possible 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 :- 18.12.2019 kkv/