Allahabad High Court
Kailash Nath Singh And Ors. vs Prin. Secy. Revenue U.P. Vidhan ... on 5 January, 2023
Bench: Rajan Roy
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 3
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 17284 of 2017
Petitioner :- Kailash Nath Singh And Ors.
Respondent :- Prin. Secy. Revenue U.P. Vidhan Bhawan Lucknow And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Mishra,Jayshanker Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J.
(C. M. Application No. 24274 of 2021)
This is an application for modification of the order dated 21.08.2017/ extension of time supported with affidavit.
An application for intervention filed by Shri Avinash Singh Bisen holding brief of Shri Prateek Shrivastava, Advocate is taken on record.
Heard learned Standing Counsel for the State and Shri Jayshanker Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite parties in this application filed by the State.
On 19.12.2022 the Court had passed the following order:-
"On 12.12.2022 the court had passed the following order:
"(C.M. Application No.24274 of 2021)
Heard.
Sri Anish Mishra, learned Addl. C.S.C. says that supplementary affidavit has been filed explaining the steps taken after passing of final order in this petition for completing the consolidation operation. The same could not be completed and two years' more time is required. He also informed the Court that contempt proceedings have been initiated by the petitioner and 19.12.2022 is the date fixed for personal appearance of the District Magistrate who happens to be District Deputy Director (Consolidation). He has not been able to trace out whereabouts of petitioners' counsel. Copy of the application has been sent to the petitioners by post. The contempt petition has been filed by some third person.
List this case on 16.12.2022.
Let the Office trace out the supplementary affidavit said to have been filed in these proceedings by the State on 22.09.2022 and place it on record."
Today a supplementary affidavit has been filed by Mr. Manish Misra, learned counsel for the opposite parties, which indicates that the stage of chak carvation has been reached and out of 102 sectors in the village chak carvation has been completed in 80 sectors and remaining will be completed in the month of December, 2022. Thereafter, the notification under Section 20 will be published after preparation of provisional consolidation scheme at Assistant Consolidation Officer level in the month of December, 2022 itself. The opposite parties seek two years' further time to complete the consolidation proceedings which were also hampered on account of the Covid-19 pandemic which continued for little more than two years. The application for modification seeks extension of time prescribed by this court vide its order dated 21.8.2017 for completion of consolidation operation. The contempt proceedings have been initiated which are fixed today for appearance of District Magistrate concerned.
Prima facie a case for extension of time is made out, however, the only impediment is that the petitioner's counsel is not traceable and in spite of service upon the petitioner as claimed by Mr. Manish Mishra and he having submitted an affidavit before the concerned authority that he has no objection if the time is extended, he is not represented before the court today. It is accordingly ordered that dasti notices be issued to the applicant/opposite parties for service of notice upon the original petitioner through the Sub Divisional Concerned who shall file his own affidavit of service before the next date.
List this case in the first week of January, 2023.
It is open for the learned Standing Counsel to inform the contempt court about this order. "
The learned counsel for the State seeks two years further time for completing the consolidation operations.
In view of the reasons already noticed in the order dated 19.12.2022 and considering the facts of the case, two years further time is granted to the concerned parties to complete the consolidation operations. The judgment dated 21.08.2017 is modified accordingly. The time mentioned in the judgment dated 21.08.2017 is extended accordingly.
The application for modification/extension of time is allowed.
The person, who has filed contempt petition alleging contempt of the order dated 21.08.2017 passed in Consolidation No. 17284 of 2017 (now Writ - B of 17284 of 2017), has filed an application for intervention through Shri Avinash Singh Bisen holding brief of Shri Prateek Shrivastava, Advocate. The applicant was not a party in the writ petition. He is not a necessary party in the application for modification. He has no locus in the matter so far as these proceedings are concerned as the petitioners before the Court are represented through Shri Jayshanker Shukla, Advocate.
The application for intervention is rejected.
.
(Rajan Roy,J.)
Order Date :- 5.1.2023
R.K.P.
