Allahabad High Court
Shyambihari vs State Of U P And 2 Others on 1 August, 2019
Bench: J.J. Munir
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1927 of 2019
Petitioner :- Shyambihari
Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sheetala Prasad Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This writ petition arises out of proceedings under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act. The petitioner claimed mutation of his name on the basis of registered Will dated 12.07.1998, executed by the late Radhika Prasad in favour of the petitioner. The Tehsildar, vide order dated 22.08.2016, dealt with mutation application and dismissed the same. The order was appealed to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, District Sant Kabir Nagar, under Section 210, of the U.P. Land Revenue Act. The appeal was also dismissed affirming the order of Tehsildar. This order was challenged in Revision before the Commissioner, Basti, who passed an order dated 12.05.2019, allowed the Revision and remanded the matter to the Tehsildar. The third respondent, who is the petitioner's brother, claiming on the basis of succession, assailed the remand order passed by the Commissioner before the Board of Revenue in revision. The Board of Revenue has admitted the revision to hearing and stayed the operation of the remand order passed by the Commissioner.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order dated 02.05.2019, passed by the Commissioner is an order of remand and, therefore the Board ought not to have interfered with the same in revision. There is generally speaking no principle of universal application that a remand order cannot be interfered with or a revision against it not entertained. This Court, at this stage, does not consider it appropriate to enter into the merits of the matter at all. The impugned order is an interlocutory order in aid of decision by the Board to be rendered in the revision that is pending before it. However, since it involves rights of parties who are brothers, and that too, on the basis of a Will on one hand from the father, it would meet the ends of justice, if the Board of Revenue U.P. at Lucknow is ordered to decide pending Revision No.1132 of 2019, District Sant Kabir Nagar, within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Considering the facts that no order prejudicial to any party or in favour of anyone is being passed here, in the sense that no rights are being determined, this Court does not consider it appropriate, to issue notice to private respondent No.3.
However, the third respondent if aggrieved by this order, would have a right to make an application in this decided petition. In view of what has been said above, the Board of Revenue U.P. at Lucknow are directed to decide Revision No.1132 of 2019 (Krishna Murari Vs. Shyambihari) district Sant Kabir Nagar, under Section 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, within a period of 3 months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
This petition is disposed of in terms of above orders. No costs.
Order Date :- 1.8.2019
Vinay
