A.P.SAHI,J. - (1.) HEARD Shri Mahendra Rai holding brief of Shri A.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Abishek Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
(2.) THE present writ petition questions the correctness of the order dated 13.2.1992 whereby the Chief Revenue Officer while setting aside the order dated 13.1.1992 has remanded the matter back to the Assistant Collector for decision afresh on the merits of the application that had been moved on behalf of the Gaon Sabha for review of the order passed on 13.1.1992 itself. In proceedings under Section 122-B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1952, the notice issued against the petitioner after contest was discharged by a detailed reasoned order dated 13.1.1992. The Gaon Sabha through its counsel moved an application for review on the same day which was allowed and the order was set aside. This order, which was passed on the review application was taken up in a revision by the petitioner. The revisional authority allowed the same but while doing so remanded the matter to the Tehsildar for decision afresh on the review application.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contends that the entire exercise under taken by the Assistant Collector for reviewing the matter is without jurisdiction and that the order which was passed on a misc. application moved on behalf of the Gaon Sabha was absolutely unjustified. It is submitted that once an order has been passed on the merits of the claim after considering the entire material on record, it was no longer open to the Assistant Collector to have proceeded to entertain an application for review of the order.;