AMRESHWAR PRATAP SAHI, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Sheo Ram Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Notice for the Gaon Sabha has been accepted by Sri R.C. Upadhyay.
(2.) THIS petition questions the correctness of orders passed by the Board of Revenue and the Sub Divisional Officer relating to the disputed holding which has been vested in the State on account of the land having been acquired by the petitioner allegedly through a sale -deed from a Scheduled Caste person without obtaining permission as contemplated under Section 157 -A of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. An order came to be passed on the complaint of the Village Pradhan against the petitioner on 9.7.2004 by the Sub -Divisional Officer. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a revision before the Board of Revenue entailing therein that the date of the sale -deed has been wrongly mentioned and that even otherwise, the permission had been taken on 10.5.1983 from the competent authority. Learned Counsel submits that these aspects were categorically stated in ground No.8 of the Grounds of Revision and it was also urged that the order passed by the Sub -Divisional Officer against the petitioner was in violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as no notice or opportunity was ever given to the petitioner prior to passing of the said order of 2004.
(3.) THE revision was dismissed in default. The petitioner filed a restoration application contending that the revision had been admitted and a stay order had also been passed in his favour, as such, the order deserves to be recalled. The delay was also explained alongwith a delay condonation application.;