Balaoo @ Panchoo and Others v. Addl. Commissioner Admn. Devipatan Mandal Gonda and Another

Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1005049 of 2014 Petitioner :- Balaoo @ Panchoo And Others Respondent :- Addl. Commissioner Admn. Devipatan Mandal Gonda And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Tabrez Iqbal,Shamshad Alam Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashish Raman Mishra Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard. By means of the present petition, the petitioners have assailed the order dated 10.06.2014 passed by Additional Commissioner (Administration), Devi Patan Mandal, District-Gonda (opposite party No.1) in revision No.516, (Navi Ahmad vs. Balaoo and Others), instituted under Section 219 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (in short "Act of 1901"). The relevant portion of the order impugned dated 10.06.2014 reads as under: "

पततवललकतअवललकनकरननपरयहपतयतजतततहहककबलऊउररपपचच

आकदककओरसनअवरनयतयतलयममगतटतससखयत-497

कननकशतददरसतलकत

वतदयलजजतककयतगयततहसललदतरदतरतअपनलआखयतकदनपक

03.05.2013

ममपचवरपनकषतआखयतकदनपककत25.03.2013

कलपनकषतकरतन

हहएयहकहतगयतककगतटतससखयत-498

कनउतरपशशचमकलननपरससशलधन

कतपसततवइसजलएककयतगयतहहकययककगतटतससखयत-498

बतगलगलहहईहह

औरइसकतरणगतटतससखयत-497

ककसलधममनकशनकलससशलजधतककयत

जतनतनयतयलकचतनहहहह।इसआखयतकनकवरदनवलअहमदककओरसन

आपजतपसतदतककगयल,

कवदतनअवरनयतयतलयदतरतउभयपकयकल petitioner

सदनकरपशनगतआदनशकदनपक27.07.2013

पतररतकरकन

ससशलधनसवलककतककयतगयतऔरआपजतकनरसतककगयल।

अवरनयतयतलय

दतरतअपनलकववनचनतममयहकहतगयतककतहसललदतरदतरतपनकषतजपच

आखयतसनसपषहहककममकतजपचकरकनयहदनखतगयतहहककजहपपनडनहलहह

वहपससशलधनपसततकवतककयतगयतहहजबककऐसतकलईसतकयपततवललपर

उपलबधनहहहह।

अवरनयतयतलयममकनगरतनलकततरदतरतइसलआशयककआपजतपसतदतकक

थलजलससशलधनपसततकवतककयतगयतहहउसममउसकनबहहतपदरतननपनडलगनहह।

कवदतनअवरनयतयतलयकलचतकहएथतककइसआपजतकनपतपहलननपरनयतय

कनदकषगतसवयसअथवतककसलसकमअजधकतरलसनसथलकतकनरलकण

करतकरवसतदशसथकतसनकभजहलजतनतचतकहएथत

,

जलउनकनदतरतनहहककयत

गयत।अवरनयतयतलयदतरतआपजतकततरककआपजतकलसरसरलतमरसन

बलहलनमतनतनहहएकनरसतकरकदयतगयतहह

,

जलकवजधसममतनहहहह।

उपरलककववनचनतकनआधतरपरममइसकनषकषरपरपहहचततहहकनगरतनलकततर

दतरतपसतदतकनगरतनलममबलहह,

जलसवलकतरककयनजतननयलगयहह।अवर

नयतयतलयदतरतपतररतआदनशकदनपक27.07.2013

कवजधसममतनहलननकन

कतरणकनरसतककयनजतननयलगयहह।

अततकनगरतनलसवलकतरककजततलहह।अवरनयतयतलयदतरतपतररतआदनश

कदनपक27.07.2013

कनरसतककयतजतततहह।पततवललअवरनयतयतलयकल

इसकनदरशकनसतथपकतपनकषतककजततलहहककऊपरककगयलकववनचनतकल

दकषगतरखतनहहएउभयपकयकलसतकयएवससदनवतईकतसमदकचतअवसर

पदतनकर,

ममकनकतसवयसयतककसलसकमअजधकतरलसनसथलकनरलकण

करतकरपदनतगदणदलषकनआधतरपरवतदकतकनसततरणकरनतसदकनशशचत

करम।आदनशककपकतकनसतथअवरनयतयतलयककपततवललवतपसभनजल जतय,

जहपपककतरकदनतसक24.6.14

कलउपशसथतहल।बतदआवशयक

कतयरवतहलदतजखलदफतरककजतय।" It is settle principle of law that the order of remand does not terminate the proceedings. The proceedings are still alive. The parties to the litigation are having full opportunity to adduce evidence before the Authority concerned. It is also settled principal of law that the order of remand simplicitor is an interlocutory order and it does not terminate the proceedings, as observed by this Court in the case of Ram Chandra Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation Lucknow reported in 2017 (134) RD 25. Reference has also been made of the judgment passed in the case of Vijay Nath and others vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and another reported in [2019 (9) ADJ 85] and the judgment dated 10.02.2023 passed by this Court in Writ-B No.108 of 2023 (Angad Pratap Singh and others vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and others). Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to entertain this petition. Further it is settled principle of law that the order of remand can only be interfered with if in it the finding(s) have been recorded which would affect the rights of the parties after remand. In the instant case, the order of remand dated 10.06.20214 is simplicitor remand order and in this, no finding was recorded so as to prejudice the rights of the petitioner before the authority concerned. As such, the order impugned is not liable to be interfered with by this Court. It further appears from the order dated 27.04.2022 annexed with the affidavit dated 18.09.2023 filed in support of the application for disposal of the writ petition that the case pending as Case No.00071

of

2018,

Computerized

Case No.D201808620000071, (Balaoo @ Panchoo vs. Navi Ahmad) has already been dismissed for want of prosecution. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the case as also nature of order dated 10.06.2014 and the settled proposition of law on the subject, this Court is not inclined interfere in the order of remand dated 10.06.2014. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Matter is consigned to record. Order Date :- 1.11.2023 Raj High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench