Allahabad High Court
Manish Kumar Shukla vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 1 October, 2024
Author: Ashutosh Srivastava
Bench: Ashutosh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:160564
Court No. - 50
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 3736 of 2024
Petitioner :- Manish Kumar Shukla
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
Heard Shri Arun Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Surendra Kumar, learned Standing Counsel, representing the State respondents.
Considering the nature of the order that is proposed to be passed notice upon the private respondent nos. 3 and 4 is being dispensed with.
The writ petition has been filed for expeditious disposal of the Revision No. 25 of 2009/10, Social Forestry Department through Divisional Director, Forest Range Officer, Bhognipur Range Pukhrayan, Kanpur Dehat vs. Sadhari Lal & others, within shortest stipulated period.
It is contended that the petitioner was the Bhumidhar of Gata No. 475. Proceedings under Section 161 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, were initiated and the Bhumidhari plot of the petitioner being Plot No. 475 was exchanged with the Plot Nos. 477, 479, and 485 which plots belong to the respondent no. 2 the Social Forestry Department. An order dated 19.02.2004 came to be passed in that regard under which the exchange was ordered. An Appeal, by a non party stranger namely Ram Singh S/o Ram Gopal, respondent no. 4 herein, was filed after lapse of four years against the order dated 19.02.2004 which was entertained by the Additional Commissioner, Kanpur Division, Kanpur and allowed vide order dated 19.02.2009. The respondent no. 2 namely the Social Forestry Department has preferred a Revision before the Board of Revenue which is stated to be pending since 2009.
Shri Arun Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that in the aforesaid Revision, on two occasions, the arguments were concluded and judgment was reserved on 06.04.2022 and 04.03.2024, respectively. However the judgment has not been delivered till date by the Board of Revenue. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that now 14.10.2024 has been fixed as the next date in the proceedings.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that on account of the pendency of the aforesaid Revision the petitioner stands deprived of his original holdings and has not been able to get the benefit of the exchange order dated 19.02.2004. He submits that the purpose of filing the present writ petition would stand sub served if appropriate directions are issued to the Board of Revenue for expeditious disposal of the pending Revision.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents, has no objection to the aforesaid proposition.
Considering the innocuous prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner the Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending and the same is accordingly disposed off by requiring the Board of Revenue, in seisin of the proceedings of the Revision No. 25 of 2009/10, Social Forestry Department through Divisional Director, Forest Range Officer, Bhognipur Range Pukhrayan, Kanpur Dehat vs. Sadhari Lal & others and to pass final orders in the same within a period of two months, from the date of service of certified copy of the order of this Court.
Order Date :- 1.10.2024
Deepak/
