Allahabad High Court
Sukath vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 27 May, 2022
Bench: Prakash Padia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15263 of 2022
Petitioner :- Sukath
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Bharti
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that fishery lease was granted in favour of the petitioner for a period of ten years in respect of pond situated at Gata No. 405 area measuring 1.011 hectare in village Dumahi (Bangara Rambux Rai), Tehsil Tamkuhi Raj, district Kushi Nagar. The aforesaid lease deed was granted in his favour by the Sub Divisional Officer, Tamkuhi Raj, District Kushi Nagar.
Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, private respondent No. 5, namely, Kitarath preferred an appeal before respondent No. 3. Collector/District Magistrate, Kushi Nagar being Appeal No. 00887 of 2019 (Computerized Case No. D201905440000887), which was rejected vide order dated 12.11.2020.
Against the order dated 12.11.2020 passed by the respondent No.3, a revision being Revision No.01164 of 2020 under Section 210 of U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 was preferred by the respondent No.5 before the Additional Commissioner, (Judicial)-I Gorakhpur Region Gorakhpur/respondent no.2. In the aforesaid revision, after expiry of seventeenth (17) months, an interim order was granted by the respondent No.2 on 27.04.2022. By the aforesaid order, revision was admitted and the order dated 12.11.2020 passed by the respondent No.3 was stayed.
It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he is running fishery business since 2018 regularly. It is further argued that the order passed by the respondent No.3 is absolutely perfect and valid order and does not call for any interference by the respondent No.2. It is argued that though the revision was filed after more than 17 months but without assigning any reasons whatsoever, the effect and operation of the order dated 12.11.2020 was stayed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and others vs Modiluft Ltd. reported in 2003 (6) Supreme Court Cases 65.
From perusal of the record, this Court is of the opinion that the order dated 27.04.2022 passed by the respondent no.2 in Revision No.01164 of 2020 (Kitarath Vs. Sukat and others) is absolutely illegal more especially in view of the fact that no cogent reason whatsoever has been given while passing the aforesaid order.
Matter requires consideration.
Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 to 3. Shri Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent No. 4.
Issue notice to respondent No. 5, returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within ten days.
Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent No. 4 prays for and is granted six weeks? time to file counter affidavit.
Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner within two weeks thereafter.
List this case after exchange of affidavits.
Until further orders of this Court, the effect and operation of order dated 27.04.2022 passed by respondent No. 2/Additional Commissioner, (Judicial)-I Gorakhpur Region Gorakhpur in revision being Revision No.01164 of 2020 under Section 210 of U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006, copy of which has been appended as annexure 1 to the wnit petition, shall remain stayed.
Order Date :- 27.5.2022
saqlain
