VIPIN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Arun Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Avinash Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4- Gaon Sabha.

(2.) The instant petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Tehsildar vide order dtd. 9/6/1993 decided the mutation matter and ordered that the parties should approach competent Court for appointment of sarvarakar and further made certain arrangement in respect to the temple in dispute. He further submitted that subsequently civil suit under Sec. 92 of Code of Civil Procedure has been filed and the suit was decreed vide judgment dtd. 15/4/2014. He next submitted that the decree of civil suit was challenged in appeal and the appellate Court has allowed the appeal setting aside the judgment and decree passed in the civil suit dtd. 15/4/2014 and restored the suit No. 1 of 2012 under Sec. 92, C.P.C. to its original number. He also submitted that since the civil Suit No. 1 of 2012 has been restored to its original number, as such, the order passed by the Tehsildar dtd. 9/6/1993 be implemented. He further submitted that the petitioner has filed the representation to this effect before respondent-authorities, which is pending, as such, necessary direction be issued for deciding the petitioner's representation in accordance with law.