RAJESH YADAV Vs. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. Pradeep Kumar Singh learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No.1. In view of order being passed, notices to opposite party No.2 stand dispensed with.

(2.) Petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

(3.) Learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No.1 has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in view of Chapter L, paragraph 494(1) of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual. It is submitted that the aforesaid chapter is comprised in part V of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual (Amendment) Regulations 2016 and specifically provides that the Board of Revenue may suo moto or on the application of a party to the suit, appeal, revision or other proceeding pass general or specific order directing the court below to decide the suit, appeal, revision or other proceeding within the period enumerated in the order. It has thus been submitted that in view of availability of alternative remedy as indicated herein above, it would not be appropriate for the petitioner to directly approach this court in petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It has also been submitted that alternative remedy has been incorporated by means of U.P. Revenue Court Manual (Amendment) Regulations 2016 and now provides an effective and efficacious alternative remedy to the petitioner.