Ran Vijai Singh, J. - (1.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner is directed to implead concerned Gaon Sabha as one of the respondent and serve the copy of the writ petition to the learned Counsel for the Gaon Sabha. Heard Sri Shams Vikas, learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned standing Counsel for the State -respondents and Sri Rajesh Yadav, learned Counsel for the Gaon Sabha.
(2.) THE petitioners are sixty one in number. They have filed the writ petition seeking writ of certiorari quashing the orders dated 20.6.2012 and 11.10.2012 passed in respective cases. It is contended that no opportunity was ever given to the petitioners before passing the impugned order and the petitioners came to know only after recording the order dated 20.6.2012 in khatauni. Learned Standing Counsel states that the petitioners are the asami lease holders, therefore no infirmity can be attached to the impugned orders and further they have got an alternative remedy of revision, therefore the writ petition be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.
(3.) THE Apex Court in Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, : 1998 (8) SCC 1 has held that in case the order is without jurisdiction or the same has been passed in breach of principles of natural justice, the writ petition should not be thrown on the ground of alternative remedy, therefore the writ petition is entertained.;