Allahabad High Court
Prabhat Chandra And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue ... on 5 May, 2023
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 18
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 13481 of 2020
Petitioner :- Prabhat Chandra And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Lko And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- A.Z. Siddiqui
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey,Shiv Shankar Singh,Tej Singh
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Case called out.
No one appeared on the behalf of the opposite party to oppose the present petition.
In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent(s) is dispensed with.
At the very outset learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to press this petition only for the relief no. 2. He further submitted that if the relief no. 2 with a prayer that after deciding the application(s) in issue the authority would do needful in relation to relief no. 2, would be entertained then in that eventuality, no prejudice would be caused to the private opposite parties, as prior to implementation of order dated 07.09.2018 the application for recall of final order dated 07.08.2018, whereby the demarcation report submitted by the revenue official in the proceeding initiated under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, registered as Case No. 0415 of 2018 was confirmed, which was filed alongwith delay condonation application in moving the same, would be disposed of, which are pending since July 2020. The relief(s) sought on reproduction reads as under:-
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Impugned Order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer Sandila district Hardoi dated 29.07.2020 contained in Annexure No. 1 to the Writ Petition;
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Sub Divisional Officer, Sandila, District Hardoi, to implement the Order dated 07.09.2018 without any delay and without being affected by any of the Applications moved by the Private Respondents."
It is further stated that concerned authority be directed to consider and dispose of the application for condonation of delay prior to passing any order on an application for recall of order dated 07.09.2018. In other words, the application for condonation of delay is liable to be decided first before entering into the merits of the case. In this regard reliance has been placed on the judgment of Division Bench of this Court dated 03.02.2022 passed in Consolidation No. 6574 of 2016 Ram Prakash Versus Deputy Director of Consolidation, Hardoi and Others. The relevant portion of the order dated 03.02.2022, on reproduction reads as under:-
"In view of the aforesaid discussion, we answer the question referred to the Division Bench that an application seeking condonation of delay has to be decided first before the appeal is taken up for hearing on merits. However, it can be on the same day and there is no requirement of adjourning the hearing of appeal on merits after acceptance of the application seeking condonation of delay."
Learned Counsel for the petitioner further stated that in view of the observation of Hon'ble Apex Court, the application for condonation of delay is liable to be decided first. Reliance has also been placed on paragraph 32 of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Noharlal Verma Versus District Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. reported in (2008) 14 SCC 445, which reads as under:-
"Now, limitation goes to the root of the matter. If a suit, appeal or application is barred by limitation, a Court or an adjudicating authority has no jurisdiction, power or authority to entertain such suit, appeal or application and to decide it on merits."
The submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner appears to be justified.
Learned State Counsel submits that he has no objection in case an expedite order is passed.
Accordingly, considering the age of litigation as also considering the submission of learned Counsel for the parties and without interfering in the order dated 29.07.2020, the present petition is finally disposed of with direction to opposite party no. 2-Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Sandila, District Hardoi, to decide the pending application(s), aforesaid, within 3 months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the parties to the litigation and also taking note of above referred judgment of this Court.
For conducting the proceedings in the time specified, unnecessary adjournments be avoided.
Further, if ultimate decision is against the private opposite parties, then in that event the opposite party no.2- Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Sandila, District Hardoi, shall do needful in the light of order dated 07.09.2018, as per law with expedition.
The petitioner shall also file an undertaking before the concerned authority that he will not take any adjournment on the dates fixed.
It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 5.5.2023
Jyoti/-
