- (1.) This Special Bench has been constituted by Hon'ble The Chief Justice on a reference made by learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 8.3.2017 in the present petition.
(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(3.) The petitioners before the learned Single Judge placed reliance on the judgment and order dated 12.7.2011 in Writ Petition no.5820 of 2002 (Kanhaiya and others) wherein the order dated 13.9.2001 passed by the Additional Commissioner in revision expunging the names of the petitioners therein had been set aside on the ground that it was passed without issuing notice to them. The counsel for the petitioners herein insisted that the petitioners being similarly situated persons challenging the common order dated 13.9.2001 are entitled for the same relief. The observations made in the referral order in this regard are relevant to be noted hereunder:- "Another supplementary affidavit has been filed by the petitioners on 20.01.2012, in which the petitioners have said that their writ petition was similar to Writ Petition No. 5820/2002 filed by Kanhaiya and others and said writ petition was allowed by order of Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 12.07.2011, copy of the said order has been filed as annexure 1 to the supplementary affidavit and a prayer has been made for grant of similar relief. The judgement and order dated 12.07.2011 shows that the same contention was raised before this Court in Writ Petition No. 5820 of 2002, that the private respondent had filed an application on the basis of which the Additional Commissioner treated the same to be a revision and without issuing notice to the petitioners had passed the order dated 13.09.2001 expunging their names and directing for recording of plot no.46 as 'charagah'. The Hon'ble Court thereafter has recorded that the party, who could have been affected had not been given an opportunity or notice in the matter. In such circumstances, the order impugned passed by the Additional Commissioner dated 13.09.2001, was quashed and the matter was remanded back to respondent no. 1 i.e. Additional Commissioner for taking appropriate decision, after issuance of notice to the petitioners and after inviting objections. While passing the order dated 12.07.2011 the Hon'ble Court also observed thus: "While passing any order, respondent no.1 will also take into consideration whether in the facts and circumstances as it has been informed that the consolidation proceeding is going on, he will have a jurisdiction to pass such order or not. All these objections have to be taken into consideration by the respondent no.1." Since this writ petition is by similarly situated petitioners as those of Writ Petition No. 5820 of 2001, which has been allowed by Coordinate Bench of this Court, which order is ordinarily binding upon this Court also, I can not take any contrary view unless I refer the matter to the Chief Justice for constitution of a Division Bench to hear and decide the following questions of law:-" ;