Allahabad High Court
Satyam vs State Of U.P. And 12 Others on 11 January, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 3114 of 2022
Petitioner :- Satyam
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 12 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Dubey,Ashok Kumar Upadhyay,Vipul Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.P.Singh,A/A0868
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondents No. 6, learned standing counsel representing respondents No. 1 to 4 and perused the record.
In Re: Civil Misc. Impleadment Application No. 3 of 2022.
Instant application has been moved to implead Manoj, Pheku Prasad, Kamlesh, Ram Kunwar and Mst. Sumari as respondents No. 5/1 to 5/5 respectively in the cause title of the instant writ petition.
It is averred in the affidavit that the respondent No. 5, Tilakdhari has already died and a substitution application was filed before the Settlement Officer of Consolidation. The Substitution application was allowed but inadvertently, respondent No. 5, Tilakdhari has been made party, therefore, his heirs and legal representatives may be ordered to be impleaded in the cause title of the present writ petition as respondents No. 5/1 to 5/5 respectively.
There is no oppose on behalf of the contesting-respondent to the impleadment application.
Accordingly, the instant application is allowed and the petitioner is directed to suffix the word 'deceased' next to the name of the respondent No. 5, Tilakdhari and further implead Manoj and others in the cause title of the present writ petition as respondents No. 5/1 to 5/5 respectively, during the course of the day.
Order on Writ Petition
The present writ petition has been, inter alia, filed for the following relief:
"(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned judgment and order dated 20.12.2021 passed by the respondent No. 4, Consolidation Officer, Phoolpur, Azamgarh passed in Case No. 417 to 420/2021 (Rampati Vs. State) under Section 9Ka (2) of UP Consolidation of Holdings Act.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned judgment and order dated 26.09.2022 passed by the respondent No. 3 passed in Case No. 16 (Trilokinath vs. State) under Section 109 Ka (1) UP Consolidation of Holdings Rules."
After due deliberation at length, learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for issuing a direction for expeditious disposal of the appeal filed under Section 11(1) of UP Consolidation of Holdings Act filed on behalf of the petitioner assailing the order dated 20.12.2021 passed by the Consolidation Officer (annexure No. 1). It is further submitted that during the pendency of the appeal, an application filed under Rule 109A of UP Consolidation of Holdings Rules has been allowed by order dated 26.9.2022 on the basis of the order dated 20.12.2021 passed by the Consolidation Officer in proceeding under Section 9A(2) of UP Consolidation of Holdings Act. In the garb of the order dated 26.9.2022, the opposite party is trying to dispossess the petitioner from the land in question, therefore, property may be protected during the pendency of the appeal before the Settlement Officer of Consolidation.
Learned Standing Counsel has no objection, in case, a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of the appeal within stipulated period as may be directed by this Court.
Learned counsel for the private-respondent No. 6 has contended that instant writ petition filed directly assailing the order passed by the Consolidation Officer, is not maintainable in the eye of law.
In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served to keep this matter pending, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition, without making any observation on the merits of the case as mentioned in the present writ petition, with a direction to Settlement Officer of Consolidation (respondent No. 2), before whom the aforementioned appeal is pending consideration, to decide the said appeal under Section 11(1) of UP Consolidation of Holdings Act expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
It is expected that it should be decided by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, it is provided that for a period of three month from today or till the date of disposal of the appeal, whichever is earlier, parties shall maintainstatus quo with respect to nature and possession over the land in question.
With the aforesaid direction, present writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 11.1.2023
vinay
