Allahabad High Court
Ashok Kumar vs State Of U P And 6 Others on 15 July, 2021
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 995 of 2021
Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U P And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Bachchu Lal Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
Heard Sri B.L. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 5.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent no.2, Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow has illegally passed remand order dated 18.03.2021 by setting aside the order dated 29.06.2020 passed by the learned Commissioner (respondent no.3).
Perusal of impugned order reveals that respondent no.2 has given a categorical finding that the order dated 29.06.2020 passed by learned Commissioner is an ex parte order, inasmuch as, amid COVID-induced lockdown, general dates were being fixed but the matter could not be heard on merits. On the date of order i.e. 29.06.2020, learned Commissioner has decide the matter ex parte in absence of respondents in revision. Perusal of order dated 29.06.2020 passed by learned Commissioner (Annexure-7) evince that it has been decided only on the basis of written arguments submitted by counsel for the revisionist. Neither anyone heard nor any written submission has been submitted before learned Commissioner, on behalf of the respondent in revision.
Learned Standing Counsel has brought the attention of the Court towards order sheet from 03.09.2019 to 29.06.2020 of the Court of learned Commissioner (Annexure-6) which reveals that throughout dates were fixed for hearing of the revision but at no stage counsel for the respondent, therein, had been heard on merits. Order sheet dated 23.06.2020 reveals that, only counsel for the revisionist had advanced his argument but no one was appeared on behalf of the respondent to put his defence, judgment was reserved and next date fixed on 29.06.2020 for delivery of judgment. Accordingly, final order was passed on 29.06.2020.
In this conspectus, it is clear that the order passed by the learned Commissioner is an ex parte order against respondent, in revision, and same has rightly been set aside by the Board of Revenue vide it's impugned order dated 17.03.2021. I find no substance in the submission advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. The petition is devoid of merits and, accordingly, dismissed.
Before parting, it is orally prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Commissioner may be directed to expedite the revision pending before him in pursuance of the order dated 18.03.2021 passed by Hon'ble Board of Revenue (respondent no.2).
Without going into the merits of the case, it is expected from the learned Commissioner (respondent no.3) that the revision pending before him, as mentioned above, shall be decided expeditiously, preferably, within the period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.
Order Date :- 15.7.2021
Manish Himwan
