- (1.) R. P. Misra, J. Heard Sri Dharampal Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. K. Sachan, learned Counsel for the contesting respondent.
(2.) VIDE order dated 25th November 1983, the restoration application of the defendant was allowed, which was set aside by the final authority i. e. Board of Revenue on 11-2-1985. In the circumstances, I think it appropriate that the matter be decided afresh on merits. The writ petition is al lowed. The orders dated 11-2-1985, passed by the Board of Revenue and 15-10-1984, passed by the Additional Commissioner are quashed. The parties are directed to appear before the Sub Divisional Officer who will decide the matter on merits as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of presentation of a certified copy pf this order before the said authority.
(3.) THE parties are directed to bear their own cost. However, it is made clear that the parties are litigating since 1970 the Sub-Divisional Officer will ensure that the matter is decided within the aforesaid period. Petition allowed. .;