- (1.) Heard Sri Amol Ranjan, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents and Sri R.C. Singh, along with Sri Shivendra Bahadur, learned Counsel for the private respondent. Learned Counsel for the respondents state that they do not propose to file any counter affidavit and the writ petition may be decided on the existing facts and legal points involved in it.
(2.) With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.
(3.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the judgment and orders dated 28.9.2012 and 30.10.2012 passed by Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur in revision No. 388/G-2012 (Satish Chandra Shahni v. Rajesh Pratap Singh) and order dated 1.4.2013 passed by learned Member, Board of Revenue in revision No. 883/LR/2012-13 (Rajesh Pratap Singh v. Satish Chandra Shahni).;