Allahabad High Court
Vishnu Dutt vs State Of U.P. And 12 Others on 16 August, 2023
Bench: Syed Qamar Rizvi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:164429
Court No. - 49
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2606 of 2023
Petitioner :- Vishnu Dutt
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 12 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Subedar Mishra,Ravi Nandan
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashish Kumar,Avinash Chandra Srivastava
Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner today in the Court is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Subedar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Jitendra Narain Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing the respondent nos.1 & 1A, Smt. Vandana Srivastava, holding brief of Sri Avinash Chandra Srivastava, has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.2/Gaon Sabha, Sri Ashish Kumar has put in appearance on behalf of respondent nos.3, 4 and 5 and perused the material available on record.
3. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 23.06.2023, passed by learned Board of Revenue, U.P. Prayagraj, in Second Appeal No.263/2023, Computerized Case No.AL2023015000263 (Om Prakash versus Vishnu Dutt and another).
4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that learned Board of Revenue, vide impugned order dated 23.06.2023, has framed the following substantial questions of law for determination :-
"1. Whether, the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned trial court being influence by the order passed in summary proceedings of mutation in sustainable in the eyes of law ?
2. Whether, the learned trial court has jurisdiction to decide the suit of the plaintiff/appellant without giving or closing his opportunity to lead evidence in support of his case as well as in rebuttal of the evidence lead by the revisionist ?
3. Whether, the learned trial court has legally dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs on merits while deciding the issue regarding maintainability of the suit ?
5. The learned Appellate Court (respondent no.1A), vide the impugned order dated 23.06.2023 has issued registered notices to the respondents and have summoned the lower court record. Learned Board of Revenue has fixed 22.08.2023 for hearing of the case on the question of admission and has passed an order to maintain status-quo till the next date fixed.
6. The main contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that learned Board of Revenue without admitting the appeal, has passed the impugned order framing the substantial question, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law and as such is liable to be quashed.
7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 5 submits that the present writ petition is pre-mature as no final order has been passed in the said appeal rather the same is already fixed for hearing on the question of admission and there is nothing illegal or against the law, in the impugned order dated 23.06.2023.
8. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner has very fairly submitted and prayed that this writ petition be disposed of with a direction to the learned Board of Revenue (respondent no.1A) to decide the question of admissibility of the appeal, expeditiously. Further, he undertakes that he will cooperate in the proceedings.
9. He further submits that since he is representing the other respondent nos.6 to 12, who are the appellants in the aforesaid appeal and pro-forma respondents in the present writ petition, accordingly, there is no need to issue notices to them.
10. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the notices to the respondent nos.6 to 12 are dispensed with.
11. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present writ petition pending. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, it is directed that learned Board of Revenue (respondent no.1A) shall consider the objections to be raised by the petitioner on the question of admission of the appeal and pass appropriate order strictly in accordance with law on the next date already fixed or within a maximum period of one month from the date of the production of the certified copy of this order by affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and shall not grant unnecessary adjournment to the either parties, unless there is any legal impediment.
12. In view of the above directions, the writ petition is, finally, disposed of.
Order Date :- 16.8.2023
m.a.
