Allahabad High Court
Ramnaresh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., ... on 24 May, 2024
Author: Alok Mathur
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39739
Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4542 of 2024
Petitioner :- Ramnaresh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Danish,Mohd. Mansoor
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Mohan Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4.
2. Under challenge are the order dated 07.03.2024 passed by the opposite party No.2-District Magistrate/Collector, District Barabanki, whereby, the Appeal No. 814 of 2023 challenging the order dated 25.09.2021 filed by petitioner under Section 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (in short "Code of 2006"), was rejected and the order dated 25.09.2021, passed by the opposite party No.3-Tehsildar, Tehsil Nawabganj, District Barabanki, whereby, the opposite party No. 2 directed the revenue official(s) concerned to evict the petitioner from Gata No.170 area 0.024 hect. and imposed fine of Rs. 66,000/- as compensation and Rs. 500/- as execution expenses.
3. Challenging the impugned order(s), learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the procedure, which ought to have been followed by the opposite party No.2 at the time of passing of final order in the proceedings instituted under Section 67 of the Code of 2006, was not followed. He also stated that the report of Lekhpal concerned should be proved and unproved report can not be relied upon. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the judgment dated 03.08.2023 passed by this Court in Writ - C No.6430 of 2023 (Shatrohan vs. State of U.P. And 4 Others) as well as order passed in Writ-C No. 6658 of 2022 ? Rishi Pal Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online All. 829.
4. It is further submitted that a perusal of the impugned order(s) would show that without following the procedure as indicated by this Court in the judgment, referred above, the opposite party No.3 passed the order dated 25.09.2021, which was affirmed by the impugned order dated 07.03.2024. As such, the indulgence of this Court is required in the matter.
5. Learned counsel appearing for side opposite could not dispute the principle settled by this Court while dealing with the proceedings instituted under Section 67 of the Code of 2006.
6. Considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties including the order dated 25.09.2021 passed by the opposite party No.3 and the order dated 07.03.2024 passed by the opposite party No.2.
7. From the impugned order dated 25.09.2021, it appears that the procedure, as indicated by this Court in the judgment referred above, was not followed while deciding the case instituted under Section 67 of the Code of 2006 by opposite party No.3 affirmed by the opposite party No.2 vide order dated 07.03.2024, who also failed to take note of the fact that while passing the order dated 25.09.2021 the opposite party No.3 has not followed the procedure prescribed. Thus, to the view of this Court, the interference is required in the matter.
8. Accordingly, the order(s) dated 07.03.2024, 06.01.2023 and 25.09.2021 are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the opposite party No.3-Tehsildar, Tehsil Nawabganj, District Barabanki to conclude the proceedings afresh, strictly in terms of law laid down by this Court in the judgment, referred above, within a period of three months as statutory provisions says that the proceedings under Section 67 of the Code of 2006 ought to have been concluded within a period of 90 days.
9. For concluding the proceedings, the opposite party No.3 shall not provide any adjournment to the petitioner and in case, the petitioner fails to appear on the date fixed, then in that event, the authority concerned is at liberty to proceed ex-parte, however, in the light of the law laid down by this Court and conclude the proceedings within a period of three months.
10. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 24.5.2024
A. Verma
(Alok Mathur, J.)
