KALI CHARAN Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AGRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition orders passed on revision under subsection (4A) of Section 122B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter called as the 'Act') has been challenged. The question involves disputed question of fact which can be established by a person aggrieved by an order under sub-section (4A) of Section 122B of the Act, in a suit in terms of subsection (4D) of the said Act.

(2.) Sub-section (4D) of Section 122B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act prescribes that any person aggrieved by the order of the Assistant Collector or Collector in respect of any property under this Section may file a suit in the Court of competent jurisdiction to establish the right claimed by him in such property. Sub-section (4E) does not preclude filing of suit against the order of Collector passed under subsection (4A) of Section 122B of the Act, though It precludes a suit against the order passed by the Assistant Collector, if revision is preferred to the Collector under sub-section (4A).

(3.) In the case of Kajoda v. Asstt. Collector, Finance and Revenue Mathura and others, 1996 (2) AWC 1042 :1996 ACJ 620, it was held that order under Section 122B of the Act can be challenged in a suit under sub-section (4D) of Section 122B of the Act. If a revision is filed, suit Is barred. But the order in revision can be challenged in suit in view of subsection (4E) of Section 122B of the Act. Disputed question of fact can best be decided in a suit which is an appropriate remedy and writ cannot be maintained.