QAMAR ABBAS Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Rohit Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Brijendra Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, Shri J.B.S. Rathour, learned counsel for the respondent no.3/ caveator and Shri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent no.7.

(2.) Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel raised a preliminary objection that this petition against the impugned order dtd. 17/11/2023 passed by the appellate authority is not maintainable because the petitioner has a remedy of revision under Sec. 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code- 2006 (here-in- after referred as the Code-2006). He relies on judgment and order dtd. 12/5/2022 passed in Writ- C No.25616 of 2021; Jhinka Devi Vs. State of U.P. and 4 Others.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner had earlier filed Writ-B No.1072 of 2023 under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India and in view of the office report, the petitioner had got dismissed the petition on the ground that the petition is maintainable under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, subsequently while preparing the petition he found that the petition is maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being against the revenue authority under the Code-2006 in view of the judgment and order dtd. 3/5/2022 passed in a bunch of writ petitions, the leading of which is Writ-B No.229 of 2023; Dinesh Chandra @ Dinesh Chandra Tiwari and Others, therefore the petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.