Allahabad High Court
Amar Nath Arora vs Board Of Revenue U.P. Lucknow & ... on 3 December, 2021
Bench: Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 9
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 30941 of 2018
Petitioner :- Amar Nath Arora
Respondent :- Board Of Revenue U.P. Lucknow & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Laltaprasad Misra,Deepak Tewari
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amit Kr. Singh Bhadauria,Mohd. Aslam Khan,Sanjay Tripathi,Shobhit Mohan Shukla
Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J.
(C.M.Application No. 37707 of 2020-Application for condonation of delay in filing review petition and C.M.Application No. 37708 of 2020-Review Application)
Heard learned counsel for the review-applicant and the learned counsel representing the writ petitioners, who have been arrayed as respondents in this application.
This is an application seeking condonation of delay in preferring the review petition, whereby the review of the judgment and order dated 07.12.2018, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 30941(MS) of 2018 has been sought.
What I notice in this case is that pursuant to the order dated 07.12.2018, the mutation proceedings went on before the court of Naib Tehsildar, where the matter was finally decided on 12.07.2019 and thereafter the review-applicant preferred an appeal against the mutation order before the Sub Divisional Officer under Section 35(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The said appeal by the appellate court/Sub Divisional Officer was also dismissed, vide order dated 05.03.2020. After dismissal of the appeal on 05.03.2020, the present review petition has been preferred on 18.06.2020.
From a perusal of the affidavit filed in support of this application, what is revealed is that after the order dated 07.12.2018, passed in the writ petition, the review-applicant had been contesting the matter before the Tehsildar and Sub Divisional Officer but once the matter had been decided by the court of Naib Tehsildar and thereafter by the appellate court, namely, the court of Sub Divisional Officer, this review petition has been preferred.
There is delay of more than one and half years in preferring this review petition and the review applicant, having availed the remedy, which was left open to him by this Court while passing the judgment and order dated 07.12.2018, has now attempted to seek review of the said judgment.
It has also been informed that after dismissal of the appeal in the mutation matter by the Sub Divisional Officer, a suit for declaration of rights under Section 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has also been preferred by the review applicant before the Sub Divisional Officer in which counter claim has been filed by the writ petitioners. It has further been informed that a suit under Section 134 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has also been filed by the review-applicant seeking eviction.
It is, thus, noticed that the review-applicant in pursuance of the judgment and order dated 07.12.2018 had availed the remedy which was left open to him. He has also instituted the suits for declaration and eviction.
In the background of the aforesaid facts, the application seeking condonation of delay cannot be permitted to be allowed. The review-applicant has already been pursuing his remedy before the revenue courts and has also instituted a writ petition challenging the order dated 12.07.2019, passed by the Naib Tehsildar and also the order dated 05.03.2020, passed by the appellate court/Sub Divisional Officer.
In the aforesaid view of the matter, I am not inclined to agree with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the review-applicant that the delay in preferring the review petition deserves to be condoned.
The application is highly misconceived, which is hereby rejected.
Consequently, the review petition is also dismissed.
The connected Writ Petition No.13434(MS) of 2020 shall be detached and shall be listed before the appropriate Court.
Order Date :- 3.12.2021
Sanjay
