SANT RAM Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Notice on behalf of the respondents no.1 to 5 has been accepted by the office of the Chief Standing Counsel. Shri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no.8. Shri Maya Ram Yadav, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent nos.6 and 7 on caveat.

(2.) A mention was made before the Court on 27/4/2022 that the matter in question relates to demolition and as such is urgent in nature and may be taken up. Upon the mention being allowed, this matter is placed before the Court today with notice to the parties concerned in the additional cause list-I.

(3.) By means of the instant petition, the grievance of the petitioners is that proceedings were initiated by the respondents no.6 and 7 under Sec. 134 of the U.P. Revenue Code against the petitioners. The said proceedings came to be decided against the petitioners by means of order dtd. 25/1/2019. The petitioners thereafter moved an application for recall of the order dtd. 25/1/2019 as it was an ex parte order. His application for recall was dismissed by means of order dtd. 27/1/2021 against which the petitioners preferred an appeal before the Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal, District Gonda. It has also been informed that his application for interim relief is also pending before the Appellate Authority and the matter is listed on 12th of May, 2022 for hearing. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also drawn the attention of the Court to the extract of the order-sheet which has been brought on record as annexure no.9 to indicate that since the filing of the appeal on almost all dates fixed on account of resolution passed by the Members of the Bar neither the application for interim relief nor the appeal could be heard and as such the matter remained pending whereas the respondents at whose behest the proceedings were initiated have already put in appearance and filed their objections.