STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Jitendra Narain Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/ State, Mr. S.C. Verma and Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for private respondent No. 4 and Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 Land Management Committee.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the lease for agricultural purpose was granted in favour of private respondents on 3/1/1991, which was approved also on 4/1/1991 in accordance with law. The proceedings for cancellation of the aforementioned lease was initiated after about 11 years i.e. on 17/6/2002 by one Ramdhari. In the aforementioned cancellation proceedings, an objection was filed on behalf of the contesting respondents/ allottees stating that the instant cancellation proceedings is barred by limitation as well as there was no illegality / irregularity in the execution of lease, as such, the cancellation proceeding at the instance of private parties is not maintainable. It is also mentioned in the objection that the allotment was made in accordance with law as provided under the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act and the Rules framed thereunder. The allotment made in favour of the private respondents were cancelled by Collector vide order dtd. 17/2/2003. Against the order dtd. 17/2/2003, revision was filed before the Commissioner on behalf of the private respondents, which was registered as Revision No. 173 A of 2003, under Sec. 333 of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1950. Additional Commissioner, Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh vide order dtd. 25/1/2008 allowed the revision setting aside the order dtd. 17/2/2003. Against the order dtd. 25/1/2008, one restoration application was filed by private party in the year 2015, another restoration application was filed by State in the year 2016 and one private party has also filed a restoration application in the year 2018 against the order dtd. 25/1/2008 before the Commissioner. All the three sets of restoration applications were consolidated and heard together. Additional Commissioner, Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh vide order dtd. 28/8/2018 rejected all the three sets of restoration application and maintained the earlier order dtd. 25/1/2008. Against the order dtd. 28/8/2018 passed by Additional Commissioner, Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh rejecting the restoration application as well as order dtd. 25/1/2008, State has filed the revision, under Sec. 333 of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act before the Board of Revenue, which has been dismissed vide order dtd. 2/1/2019, hence this writ petition.

(3.) Stamp reporter has reported the laches of 1629 days in filing the writ petition.