- (1.) Heard Sri Rana Mrityunjai Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Chandra Shekhar, learned counsel for opposite party no.4 and opposite party nos. 1, 2 and 3 are represented by counsel for the State.
(2.) This writ petition has been filed by Munni Lal for issuing a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 25.4.2007 and 28.4.2006 Annexure 1 and 13 respectively and also to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to opposite party nos. 1, 2 and 3 to restore the possession of the petitioner.
(3.) It has been averred in the writ petition that late Sri Shanker Bux Singh (father of opposite party no.4) had taken some loan from the State Bank of India, Branch Sandila, District- Hardoi, for purchase of a Tractor and due to non payment of said Loan, his agricultural land of Khata No.19 Plot Nos. 394, 371 etc. area 11 Bigha was auctioned by the Tehsil authorities of Tehsil Sandila on 7.1.1991 and petitioners bid of Rs. 70, 000/- being highest was accepted on 7.01.1991, 1/4th amount of auctioned money was immediately deposited by the petitioners and the remaining 3/4 money was deposited within 15 days' as per the provisions of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Rules,1952. Shanker Bux filed an objection under Rule 95(1) of U.P.Z.A. & L. R. Rules, 1952 on 29.01.1991 before the Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow which was decided by the Commissioner, Lucknow holding that objection was baseless and had no legal force decided on 23.3.1993. The objection was decided on 23.3.1993. After the bid was accepted petitioners deposited the necessary fee for the purchase of the stamps for registration and the Sale Certificates were issued by opposite party no.3 Up Ziladhikari, Tehsil Sandila, District-Hardoi. Mutation in the name of the petitioners had also been effected in the revenue records and they were given the physical possession. After his objection against the sale auction was rejected by the Commissioner, Lucknow. He filed a revision before Board of Revenue,Lucknow under Section 219 of the U.P Land Revenue Act, 1901. During the pendency of the revision Shanker Bux Singh is dead in the month of August of 1998, and Rakesh Singh, opposite party no.4 of that revision also died on 20.6.1999 but no substitution application was filed by legal heirs of the opposite party no.4. Hence the Revision application ought to have been abated under law. An application was moved by petitioner before Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow on 3.11.1999 with a prayer to dismiss the revision being abated. Legal heirs of Shanker Bux Singh filed substitution application on 3.11.1999 opposite parties have filed any objection against the abatement application. Board of Revenue fixed on 23.5.2006 for disposal of both the applications. Later on an application dated 29.3.2006 for early hearing of the case was moved and without any notice to the petitioners 28.4.2006 was fixed for hearing. Petitioners or their counsel were not given any notice of the application and on 28.4.2006 revision was allowed.;