BITOLA MUNWARI Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri H. M. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. K. Bisariya, learned counsel for the duly impleaded respondents.

(2.) Sri P. K. Bisariya has raised preliminary objection to the effect that the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Commissioner under the provisions of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules and he has remedy as held by the Full Bench of this Court in Ram Swaroop v. Board of Revenue and Ors., 1990 RD 291, wherein the Full Bench has said that the order passed by the revisional authority will apply to recovery of arrears and the orders passed by the Commissioner will be amenable to revisional jurisdiction of the Board of Revenue under Section 219 of the U. P. Land Revenue Act. Sri Bisariya has submitted that in view of this Full Bench decision, the petitioner should be relegated to the alternative remedy of filing a revision before the Board of Revenue.

(3.) Sri H, M. Srivastava has submitted that since the petition has been pending since 1990 and interim order was also granted by this Court. At this stage, in the year 2002 the petitioner should not be relegated to the alternative remedy for filing revision before the Board of Revenue. For this he relied upon the decision of the learned single Judge of this Court in Mohd. Yamin and Ors. v. Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut and Ors., 1992 AWC (Suppl.) 593 : 1993 RD 62.