Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15480 of 2018 Petitioner :- Smt. Suman Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar,Ram Krishna Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashish Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Sri Ram Krishna Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri A.K.Srivastava, learned Counsel for the respondent no.4.
The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 21.9.2015 passed by the second respondent, Additional Collector (Finance & Revenue), Firozabad under Section 198(4) of U.P.ZA&LR Act and the revisional order dated 25.11.2016 passed by the third respondent, Additional Commissioner ( Admin.), Agra Division, Agra.
In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner precisely states that the proceeding has been finalized against 72 persons including the father of the petitioner late Mahesh Chandra (revisionist no.55) and said order has been upheld in the aforesaid revision. The father of the petitioner died on 5.1.2016 and at no point of time, the heirs of the deceased Mahesh Chandra were ever substituted. The petitioner being daughter of late Mahesh Chandra (revisionist no.55) had also no knowledge about the pendency of the aforesaid revision and as such, for all practical purposes aforesaid proceeding has been finalized against the dead person.
On the other hand, Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel has opposed the writ petition and placed reliance on the opening paragraph of the revisional order, wherein categorical averment has been made that counsel for the revisionist has been heard in the matter and it was incumbent upon the counsel for the revisionist to apprise the correct fact before the revisional court but at no point of time, any sincere effort had been made in this regard. He has also placed reliance on the order dated 21.9.2015 passed under Section 198(4) of UP Z.A. & L.R. Act, wherein the competent authority had clearly proceeded to observe that at no point of time, any Munadi has been done in the matter and in most arbitrary manner, the alleged allotment was made and as such, no interference is required in the matter.
Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the leave may be accorded to the petitioner to move appropriate recall/restoration application in the aforesaid revision for recalling the revisional order.
In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of with observations that in case the petitioner files appropriate recall/restoration application before the revisional authority within 15 days' from today, the revisional authority will decide the application in next three months after giving opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders.
Order Date :- 30.4.2018 RKP