Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19466 of 2018 Petitioner :- Usha Devi And Another Respondent :- The Commissioner, Meerut Division And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kr. Srivastava,Ajay Kr. Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mahesh Narain Singh
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned State Law Officer. Shri Mahesh Narain Singh appears for Gaon Sabha.
In view of the order proposed to be passed, notices need not go to private respondent.
The petitioners are before this Court assailing the order dated 15.11.2017 passed by respondent no.1 in Revision No.30 of 2015-16 under Section 219 of LR Act (Santram v. Usha Devi & Ors.) by which setting aside the orders impugned the matter was remitted to Tehsildar concerned for considering the matter afresh.
The record in question reflects that once Harbir, who is brother of the petitioners tried to dispossess the petitioners from the property in dispute ignoring the sale deed, the petitioners have no other option except to institute Original Suit No.19 of 2014 (Smt. Usha Devi & Anr. v. Harbir & Ors.) seeking permanent injunction for the land in dispute. In the said suit interim injunction was granted on 20.2.2014 restraining the defendant from transferring the property under suit till the next date. It appears that meanwhile proceeding under Section 34/35 of LR Act has been initiated and the petitioners are aggrieved with the revisional order remitting the matter back to the Tehsildar concerned for considering the matter afresh.
Learned State Law officer has raised preliminary objection that petitioners are assailing revisional order, which is offshoot of the proceeding under Section 34/35 of LR Act and the same is summary in nature. So far as the right of the petitioners are concerned, the same can very well be available to the petitioners before the competent court and for the same petitioners have already instituted suit in question and the same is pending consideration and as such no interference is required in the matter.
The Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and find substance in the objection raised by learned Standing Counsel. The Court does not find any infirmity or illegality in the order impugned passed by the revisional authority. Moreover, the petitioners can also agitate their claim before the suit in question filed by them.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 28.5.2018 SP/