ANURAG MISHRA Vs. RAJKUMAR @ RAJU SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order would Govern the fate of W.P. No.3077/2011 also. Both the petitions have heard analogously and decided by common order. For brevity and clarity purpose facts of W.P. No. 3076/2011 are taken into consideration.

(2.) The present petition is being preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 11.03.2011 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Court of Additional Commissioner, Chambal Division, Morena, (M.P.), whereby, the revision preferred by the respondent has been allowed and order dated 20.12.2010 passed by the Collector, District-Bhind is hereby set aside.

(3.) Precisely stated facts of the case are that ancestors of the petitioner namely Thakurdeen was maufidar of the temple Vankhandeshwar Mahadev. In the year 1860 (Samvat 1917) erstwhile Ruler of the State, enhanced the amount of Rs. 100/- in the maufi already granted to Shri Thakurdeen vide Annexure P/2. After death of Shri Thakurdeen, his successor took his place and line of succession continued up to the petitioner. Various documents are placed in this regard. It appears that one of his successors Shri Gopal Krishna Mishra succeeded in 1977 and till his death in 2001, continued worshiping in the temple. Since, the respondent was also taking part in taking care and seva pooja of Deity/temple on behalf of Gopal Krishna Mishra, therefore, taking benefit of this liberty respondent without knowledge of late Shri Gopal Krishna Mishra managed and get an order dated 11.01.1995 regarding appointment of Pujari vide Annexure P/7. Petitioner did not have the knowledge of the said order as this order have taken allegedly in a suspicious manner. After the knowledge of this event, petitioner applied for certified copy and thereafter, preferred the first appeal before the Collector, District Bhind along with application under Section 5 of Limitation Act. It appears that the Collector proceeded with the appeal and record was called. Despite several reminders, when record was not called, then Collector passed an order dated 20.12.2010 reprimanding the lower staff of Sub Divisional Officer, with some pungent remarks about the fate of case. This, gave a chance to the respondent to prefer a revision before the Additional Commissioner, Chambal Division, Morena with prayer for direction to the Collector to pass order in accordance with law. After remanding the matter, Additional Commissioner, Chambal Division, Morena passed the impugned order, therefore, the petitioner appeared before this Court.