RAN VIJAI SINGH, J. - (1.) HEARD Dr. H.N.Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Amresh Singh, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha.
(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 11.5.2015 by which the Sub -Divisional Officer, Sadar Bareilly has directed to remove the possession of the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 16.9.2010 passed by the Sub -Divisional Officer in Suit No. 09/2008 -09 under Section 209 of U.P.Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. This order appears to have been passed pursuant to the order of this Court dated 4.7.2014 passed in Writ -C No. 34094 of 2014 ( Ratan Babu Saxena Vs. State of U.P. and others ), which was filed with the prayer to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to execute the order dated 16.9.2010. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of with the following observation : - The petitioner, if so advised, may file an appropriate application before the court / authority concerned for redressal of his grievance. In case such an application is filed by the petitioner, alongwith the certified copy of the order of this Court, the same may be considered and decided by passing a reasoned speaking order expeditiously in accordance with law, after hearing all concerned, but not later than three months from the date of filing of the application.
(3.) IT is contended that against the judgment and decree dated 16.9.2010 passed by the Sub -Divisional Officer, the petitioner has preferred Appeal No.58 of 2013 before the Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly. This Court, vide order dated 13.11.2014 passed in Writ -C No.60262 of 2014, has directed the learned Commissioner to decide the appeal within a period of six months. In the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the arguments have been concluded and the judgment is reserved. The respondent no. 3, concealing all these facts, has obtained the order of this Court dated 4.7.2014 in Writ -C No. 34094 of 2014. The Sub -Divisional Officer, without assigning any reason and without recording any finding that the order dated 16.9.2010 has attained finality, has passed the impugned order contrary to the direction of this Court whereas it was specifically provided that the judgment and decree dated 16.9.2010 be executed only after hearing all concerned by passing a reasoned speaking order.;