SHANTI Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE LKO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri S.N. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel and Sri S.C. Verma alongwith Sri K.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.

(2.) Aggrieved by this order, the respondent No. 3 has filed revision on 27.12.2012 before the Additional Commissioner Administration Gorakhpur Division Gorakhpur which was numbered as Revision No. 28/65/M-2012. The said revision was allowed on the very next date i.e. on 28th December, 2012 by the Additional Commissioner without issuing any notice to the respondents (the petitioners herein). Challenging this order, the petitioners have filed Revision No. 848/LR/2012-13 [Smt. Shanti Devi and others v. Rameshwar and others). The said revision was dismissed after hearing both the parties on the ground that by the order dated 28.12.2012, the matter has only been remanded after setting aside the order dated 19.3.2012 for fresh disposal after hearing both the parties.

(3.) Sri Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the order dated 28.12.2012 is totally an illegal order as it was passed without issuing any notice and hearing to the respondents (the petitioners herein). In his submissions, it is settled that even an administrative order, which leads to civil consequences, must be passed in conformity with the principles of natural justice and the procedure adopted must be just, fair and reasonable. Therefore the learned Member Board of Revenue has erred in dismissing the petitioners' revision.