KHAGENDRA PRATAP SAHI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. B. Mehrotra, J. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel.

(2.) IN the facts of the case, learned Standing Counsel has agreed that no counter affidavit need to be filed. Learned Counsel for the parties have agreed that this writ petition may be disposed of at the admission stage.

(3.) IN view of the aforesaid mandatory provision the impugned order was passed dismissing the appeal on merits in violation of the mandate of Order XLI, Rule 17, C. P. C. Accordingly, the aforesaid order is to be set aside. IN the cir cumstances of the case, it is directed that the petitioner's appeal be fixed for hear ing on some date with in a month on the petitioner's presentation of a certified copy of this order. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has also given undertaking that the petitioner will not seek any adjournment before the Commissioner while deciding the appeal. The appeal will be heard and decided on merits on the date fixed by the Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur in pursuance of this order. The order dated 1-2-1996 passed by the Commissioner dismissing the appeal, is hereby quashed. However, it is being made clear that in case the petitioner fails to file a certified copy of this order within fifteen days from today or violates the undertaking by his Counsel the petitioner will not ger the relief granted by this order. It is further directed that the petitioner will not be dispossessed from the surplus land till the decision of the petitioner's appeal.