Ravindra Kumar vs Addl. Commissioner, ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 20216 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


 
Court No. - 18
 

 
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3931 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Ravindra Kumar
 
Respondent :- Addl. Commissioner, Lko.(Administrative) Division, Lko. And 8 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar Gupta
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey,Neeraj Trivedi
 

 
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Hemant Pandey, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents.

2. In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondents No.5 to 9 is dispensed with.

3. The petitioner has approached this Court with a limited prayer that an application for recall dated 01.06.2019 has been filed by the private-respondents No.5 to 8 in a revision, which is pending before the respondent No.1 and despite a number of dates have been fixed, yet it has not been decided, hence, it may be decided expeditiously.

4. The petitioner was required to file the entire order-sheets in respect of the proceedings of which he sought expedition.

5. On 30.11.2022, the Court had passed the following order, which reads as under:-

"The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking expeditious disposal of his recall application filed on 01.06.2019.

This Court had required the learned counsel for the petitioner to file the order-sheet in respect of the proceeding of which he seek expedition.

Today a supplementary-affidavit has been filed by the petitioner wherein in paragraphs 2 and 3, it has been stated that the petitioner has applied for the certified copies but the same has not been made available as there is no signature of the Presiding Officer so that the same could not be issued.

The averments made in paragraph-3 is of serious nature, accordingly let the record of the Revision No.1399 of 2015 (Ramu @ Ravindra Chandra Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P. & others) be summoned and be placed before the Court on 6th of December, 2022.

Learned Standing Counsel shall ensure that the record is made available.

List this matter on 6th of December, 2022, as fresh."

6. In furtherance of the said order, the record was placed before this Court on 06.12.2022 and contention was raised by the learned Standing Counsel that the petitioner has not indicated the correct position regarding applying for the certified copies to the effect that though he had applied, but had not collected the same and it is not correct to state that the order-sheets have not been provided.

7. It is in view thereof, the Court had placed the matter for 07.12.2022 and required the learned standing counsel to produce the originals of the photocopy which was presented before the Court on 06.12.2022.

8. Today, after hearing the parties and from a perusal of the original record of revision, which has been placed before the Court, this Court finds that the revision in question was partly allowed by means of the order dated 27.05.2019. The private-respondents moved an application for recall of the order dated 27.05.2019 on 01.06.2019. It is for the aforesaid reason that the instant petition has been filed seeking expeditious disposal of the recall application dated 01.06.2019.

9. From a perusal of the original record, which has been made available, this Court is pained to note that though the application for recall was moved in the year 2019, but apart from few scattered dates mentioned on the order-sheet, there is no proper order-sheet drawn. There are few dates on which a stereotyped order embossed on a rubber stamp has been affixed and most of the orders are not signed by any Presiding Officer.

10. In order to indicate what is being meant by this Court, the scanned portion of the original record of the order-sheets and the manner in which the dates have been affixed without proper signatures of the Presiding Officer and use of rubber stamp for writing the order is being reproduced for clarity.

11. From the above, it would indicate that it is the extracts of judicial record and amplifies the condition and the manner in which the functioning is being undertaken by the revenue Courts and its Officers.

12. It is also relevant to notice that the proceedings of the instant case are pending before the Additional Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow.

13. This Court finds that since 2019, there are no proper order-sheets which have been drawn and most of them have not been signed by the Presiding Officer. This is completely unacceptable. The order-sheet is a vital link which reflects the date to date progress of the case and also indicates for what purpose is the next date being fixed. This entire chain of order-sheets and the orders help in knowing the progress of the case as well as bring in transparency in the proceedings.

14. Needless to say, the same has not been done. Apart from the fact that the U.P. Revenue Court Manual has clear provisions regarding the maintenance of the order-sheets.

15. This Court had the occasions to notice similar such instance where the order-sheets were not properly written as noticed in the case of Awadhesh Kumar and others v. District Magistrate, Lucknow and others, MANU/UP/2566/2022, wherein in Paragraph-26, this Court had noted as under:-

"26. The relevant provisions contained in the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Court Manual which relates to institution of the suit and drawing of the order-sheets, the issuance of the notice and the duties of the Presiding Officer and their readers is also mentioned and the relevant Regulations in respect thereto are being reproduced hereinafter:-

"29. Particulars to be written on order-sheet-The order-sheet (paragraph 1202, Revenue Manual) shall contain a note of every order made in the suit or case, and shall show, the date of and the proceedings at every hearing. It shall show, amongst other matters the names of the parties present or of their counsel, if they are represented by counsel, or of their duly authorized agents and the dates on which the plaint and written statement were filed, issues were recorded, or amended, witnesses examined and the names of such witnesses, of the delivery of judgments, of the signing of the decree, and of any application for review of judgment or amendment of the decree. It shall also contain a note of every proceeding such as the reading of the deposition of a witness examined by commission; the reading of a commission's report and of the fact of any objection being made thereto and if witnesses are in attendance when a case is adjourned, the fact shall be noted.

30. Order sheet to be written by the presiding officer or by an officer of the Court to be signed by presiding officer-Every order on the order-sheet shall be written by the presiding officer or by an officer of the Court under his superintendence, and shall be signed by the presiding officer.

[Note An officer should be appointed in respect of each Court to sign the order fixing the adjourned date under Rule 32, in the absence of the presiding officer due to sudden illness or some other such cause].

* * * * * * * * * *

32 Order affixing dates or directing anything to be done by parties should be signed by parties or their pleaders-Order fixing dates of adjourned dates for hearing or directing anything to be done by the parties of their pleaders whether recorded in the order-sheet or elsewhere shall be signed then and there by the parties or their pleaders.

* * * * * * * * * *

The Uttar Pradesh Revenue Court Manual (Amendment) Regulations, 2016

472. Procedure applicable to the summary proceedings-Procedure prescribed in this chapter shall, subject to the provisions of the Code and the Rules, apply to the summary proceedings under the Code and the Rules.

* * * * * * * * * *

475- Presentation and scrutiny of application -(1) The official F authorised to receive the application shall endorse on the application the date on which it is presented and shall sign the endorsement.

(2) If, on scrutiny, the application is found to be in order, it shall be duly registered and given a serial number.

(3) If the application, on scrutiny, is found to be defective and the defect noticed is formal in nature, the official may allow the applicant or his counsel to remove the defect in his presence, and if the said defect is not formal in nature, the official may allow the applicant or his counsel to rectify the defect at such time as he may deem fit and the endorsement thereof shall be made a on the application which shall be signed by the party or counsel thereof.

(4) If the applicant fails to rectify the defect within the time allowed under the preceding sub- para, the official may decline to register the application and if so, he shall place the matter before the Presiding Officer for appropriate orders.

(5) All the registered applications shall be posted for admission/order before the appropriate Presiding Officer on the next working day. The notice of the posting shall be given by notifying in the Daily Cause List for the day.

(6) The Board shall, apart from the Offline system, endeavour to adopt the online system for the submitting the application processing and depositing the fee prescribed therefor."

16. Further, in Paragraphs-41 and 42, this Court had passed the following directions. The extracts of which is being reproduced hereinafter for ready reference:-

"41. Thus, exercising powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this Court issue directions to the Principal Secretary (Revenue), Government of Uttar Pradesh, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow as well as the Chairman, Board of Revenue, Lucknow to pass the necessary orders ensuring that the cases which are filed before the Revenue Courts are promptly registered. The order-sheets are properly drawn and signed by the Presiding Officer of the respective Courts promptly. To ensure its efficacy and implementation necessary checks and regular inspections be made in Tehsils in all districts of the State periodically and at intervals to oversee that the compliancies are being made.

42. The Principal Secretary (Revenue) shall also hold an enquiry into the matter relating to non-registration of the case of the petitioners which was filed on 30.04.2022 and the first order-sheet, which came to be written on 06.09.2022 registering the case in light of the observations made in Paragraphs 38 to 40 of this judgment and it be completed within three months. Upon the conclusion of the enquiry, the necessary action be taken against the person found responsible and guilty. A copy of the said enquiry report with the action taken be placed on the record of this case."

17. It appears that despite directions issued by this Court the message has not percolated and it is apparent that in this case as well, the order-sheets have not been drawn, which gives rise to arbitrariness, non-transparency and it breaks the chain of the progress of the case which in turn affects the morale of the litigating public and instills a dent in the solemnity of the proceedings.

18. There is another aspect that if the Court of Additional Commissioner which in terms of the jurisdiction exercised by them under the revenue laws are conferred with Appellate and Revisional powers which are conferred on Superior Courts and they conduct the proceedings in such a casual manner then what message will it give to the Subordinate Courts, who would be emboldened to violate the necessary regulations which will give rise to total disorder and breakdown of judicial discipline.

19. An application for recall as noticed in the instant case is pending since 2019 and from the record, it cannot be even deciphered when the objection has been filed when any notice was issued, whether the notices have been served, what are the dates being fixed and for what purpose. It does not even reflect who appeared for the parties and what document/application/objections were filed.

20. The Presiding Officer of the Court is a master of his own Court and it is his duty to ensure that the proceedings are conducted in an articulate manner and in accordance with the statute and regulations and to maintain the judicial hierarch and discipline.

21. Having noticed the unsatisfactory manner in which the case file and more particularly the order-sheets have been drawn, thus, the petitioner's stand that he was not given the certified copy is understandable and he is exempted from filing it.

22. Having regard to the prayer made by the petitioner is concerned regarding expeditious disposal, this Court without entering into the merits of the case directs the Additional Commissioner, before whom the matter is pending, to consider and decide the recall application preferably on the next date fixed and in case if the same is not possible then within three weeks thereafter after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of.

23. However, a copy of this order shall be placed before the Principal Secretary (Revenue), Government of U.P., who shall hold an enquiry and the result of the enquiry and its report shall be submitted before this Court within two months indicting what action has been taken against persons found responsible for this sorry state of affairs and shall also inform what efforts have been made to comply with the directions issued by this Court in Awadhesh Kumar (supra).

24. A copy of this order shall be served on the Principal Secretary (Revenue), Government of U.P., Lucknow through the Senior Registrar of this Court.

25. List this matter on 01.03.2023 for consideration of the report.

26. The record which was retained by this Court, has been handed over to Shri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned standing counsel for returning the same to the Court concerned.

Order Date :- 07.12.2022

Rakesh/-