Adarsh Sahkari Avas Samiti ... vs Board Of Revenue And Others
2013 Latest Caselaw 5747 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 21
 

 
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 1184 of 1993
 

 
Petitioner :- Adarsh Sahkari Avas Samiti Limited
 
Respondent :- Board Of Revenue And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Nirmal Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C S C
 

 
Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan,J.

Heard Shri Nirmal Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Notices were issued to the contesting respondents but, no one appears on their behalf.

Initially on 16.09.1991 an order was passed in case No. 724 Adarsh Sahkari Awas Samiti Vs. Surendra Mohan Hans in favour of the petitioner mutating its name in the revenue records over the land in dispute.

Thereafter, a restoration application was filed by the opposite party no. 4 i.e. Gopal Nagar Sewa Samiti Limited, Mirzapur, Ghaziabad. Without issuing notice to the petitioner, in whose favour order dated 16.09.1991 had been passed, Nayab Tehsildar, Ghaziabad through order dated 30.09.1991 set aside the earlier order dated 16.09.1991, on the ground that it was an ex-parte order and restored the case on its number.

Against the order dated 30.09.1991 a revision was filed, which was dismissed by the Additional Collector on 30.03.1993, second revision No. 117/1992-93 was filed which was dismissed by the Board of revenue, Lucknow on 28.04.1993, hence this writ petition.

Normally in restoration orders, interference is not made in exercise of writ jurisdiction. However, in the instant case without assigning any reason and without issuing any notice to the petitioner in whose favour earlier order had been passed, Nayab Tehsildar, Ghaziabad, set aside the said order, which is not permissible under law.

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Order dated 30.09.1991 is set aside. The Nayab Tehsildar, Ghaziabad, is directed to decide the restoration application again after hearing all the parties.

As no one appeared for the contesting respondents hence, petitioner is directed to file certified copy of this order before the Nayab Tehsildar, Ghaziabad, within six weeks from today alongwith counter affidavit/objection to the restoration application, which was filed by the respondent No. 4 before the Nayab Tehsildar. It is further directed that the Nayab Tehsildar shall issue notice to the respondent No. 4 and thereafter hear the parties on the restoration application as well as merit of the case and decide the restoration application and in case restoration application is allowed, by the same judgment the mutation case shall also be decided on merit.

In case, certified copy of this judgment and the objections are not filed within six weeks then this writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed.

Writ petition is accordingly allowed as above.

Order Date :- 12.9.2013

Deepak