Jagdish vs State Of Up And 4 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 6127 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Jagdish vs State Of Up And 4 Others on 29 February, 2024

Author: Saral Srivastava

Bench: Saral Srivastava

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:37109
 
Court No. - 5
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1299 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Jagdish
 
Respondent :- State Of Up And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ritesh Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi,C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

2. The petitioner by means of present writ petition has assailed the order dated 16.10.2023 passed by respondent No.2 in Case No.1793 of 2023 (Computerized Case No.D202314360001793) (Jagdish Vs. State) under Section 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 as well as order dated 30.01.2023 passed by respondent No.3 in Case No.RST/06937 of 2019 (Computerized Case No.T201914360306937) under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and order dated 11.10.2019 passed by respondent No.3 in Case No.06937 of 2019 (Computerized Case No.T201914360306937) under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (Annexure Nos.3, 2 & 1 to the writ petition).

3. Considering the nature of the order to be passed in the present writ petition, this Court is not inclined to call for any counter affidavit.

4. The sole ground on which orders have been challenged is that the Tehsildar as well as the appellate authority while deciding the proceedings under Section 67 of the UP Revenue Code, 2006 has failed to comply with the directions of this Court in the case of Rishipal Singh v. State of U.P. and Others 2023 (1) ADJ 154 inasmuch as neither the statement of the Lekhpal was recorded nor the petitioner was given any notice and opportunity of hearing to cross examine the Lekhpal. In such view of the fact, the order passed by the Tehsildar cannot be sustained in law and the order passed by the appellate authority also cannot be sustained for the aforesaid reason.

5. Be that as it may, perusal of the orders impugned reveals that the Tehsildar while deciding the proceeding under Section 67 of UP Revenue Code, 2006 has failed to record any statement of the Lekhpal nor the petitioner was given any notice and opportunity of hearing to cross examine the Lekhpal. The appellate authority has also failed to consider the aforesaid aspect of the matter while dismissing the appeal of the petitioner.

6. In such view of the fact, the orders impugned passed by authorities below are not sustainable in law in view of the judgement of this Court in the case ofRishipal Singh (supra) and are hereby set aside.

7. The writ petition is allowed and the matter is remanded to the Assistant Collector Ist Class/Tehsildar, Tehsil Machhalishahar, District Jaunpur to decide the dispute afresh after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties and in accordance with the guidelines laid in the judgment ofRishipal Singh (supra).

8. In case, there is any concealment of fact by the petitioner in obtaining the present order, the respondents are at liberty to file recall application to recall the said order.

Order Date :- 29.2.2024

R.S. Tiwari