Allahabad High Court
Mahant Murli Das vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ... on 26 September, 2023
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:62355
Court No. - 18
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4856 of 2023
Petitioner :- Mahant Murli Das
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Revenue), Lucknow And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Jageshwari Prasad Mathur
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Notice on behalf of all the respondents i.e. respondent nos. 1 to 4 has been accepted by Office of Chief Standing Counsel.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri H.K. Bhatt, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-respondents.
3. Present petition has been filed for the following main relief:-
"i. Issue direction in the nature of mandamus thereby the opposite party no. 1, 3 & 4 be directed not to dispossess the petitioner from land Gata No.247/0.6450 hectare at Kotramchandra Awadh, Tehsil Pargana Sadar, Haweli District Ayodhya till disposal of the Revision No.1842 of 2023 pending before the opposite party no.2 i.e. Board of Revenue and not to change the nature of the land.
ii. That issue a direction thereby the Board of Revenue Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow be directed to consider and decide the application for stay file along with Revision No. 1842 of 2023 placed at Annexure No.3 with the petition.
iii. Issue any other direction or order for stay of judgment dated 02.06.2023 impugned in the Revision passed in Case No.3174 of 2023 under Section 33/39 U.P. L.R. Act 1901 In Re.: State Vs. Mahant Murli Das till disposal of the Revision pending before the Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow."
4. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner, for the purpose of main relief sought, quoted above, is that entry in the revenue records, which was existing since long, with regard to Gata No. 247/Area 0.6450 hectare situated at Kotramchandra Awadh, Tehsil Pargana Sadar, Haweli District Ayodhya has been disturbed by an order dated 02.06.2023 passed by opposite party no.4/Joint Magistrate/Up Ziladhikari, Tehsil Sadar, Ayodhya in Case No. 3174 of 2023 (State Vs. Mahant Murli Das) in exercise of power under Section 33/39 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (in short "Act, 1901") and being aggrieved by this order dated 02.06.2023, the petitioner has approached the Revisional Authority by means of revision under Section 219 of Act, 1901 and the same is pending consideration as Case No. 1842 of 2023 (Mahant Murli Das Vs. State of U.P.) and along with this revision an application seeking interim protection was also filed as the State Authorities are adamant to change the nature of the land, in issue.
5. He further submitted that in the revision, the next date fixed is 27.09.2023. In this regard, reference has been made to questionnaire, annexed at Page No. 54 of the paper-book.
6. He further submitted that in absence of any interim protection, the State Authorities would completely change the nature of the land, in issue, and as such, the interim protection is extremely required particularly taking note of the fact that the entry was existing in the revenue record in favour of the petitioner since long i.e. from fasli year 1391 (C.E. 1984).
7. He further submitted that if interim protection is not provided to the petitioner, in revision, then the revision would become infructuous for all practical purposes.
8. Opposing the present petition, Shri H.K. Bhatt, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State says that before the Revisional Authority, the State Counsel is available and on the next date fixed, he would be available in the revision as indicated by the petitioner i.e. 27.09.2023.
9. He also submitted that in the U.P. Revenue Court Manual (in short "Manual"), there is a provision under which the authority concerned can pass ex-parte interim order, if so requires in the facts and circumstances of the case. In this regard, reference has been made to Para 489 of Manual and so far as the relief of expeditious disposal of the pending application seeking interim protection is concerned, if this Court is of the opinion that direction is required for expedite proceedings, the State has no objection.
10. Considering the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of in following terms.
(i) The respondent No.2-Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow is directed to consider the issue of admission of revision as also the prayer of interim protection sought by the petitioner by means of an application, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure No. 3 to the petition, on the next date fixed i.e. 27.09.2023 as per law including taking note of Para 489 of Manual and the said application be disposed of within a maximum period of two months from the next date fixed by passing a reasoned and speaking order.
(ii) The State Counsel shall not take any unnecessary adjournment in disposal of the revision, in issue.
(iii) The petitioner is also directed to file an undertaking that he will appear on each date fixed in the case.
11. It is expected, in view of Para 458(1) of Manual, that the respondent no.2/Board of Revenue U.P. at Lucknow shall consider and decide the revision, most expeditiously, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties to the litigation and without granting any unnecessary adjournments, preferably within a period of two months from the next date fixed in the case.
12. It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the authority/court concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.
13. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.9.2023
Mohit Singh/-
..............................................(Saurabh Lavania,J.)
