Hon’ble A.P. Sahi, J.—The petitioner has come up praying for quashing of the order dated 6.9.2011 passed by the Collector, Gautam Budh Nagar, refusing to entertain the restoration application of the petitioner for correction/rectification of the order dated 7.4.1993 on the ground that the correction sought is time barred, and secondly in view of the orders passed by the High Court and the Apex Court, the Collector will have no authority to carry out corrections in the order dated 7.4.1993 which was subject matter of controversy before the said Courts and has been affirmed.

2. The petitioner has further prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents to dispose of the petitioner’s application dated 22.2.1995 which had been filed for rectification of the order dated 7.4.1993 in terms of the directions of the High Court dated 22.9.2004 passed in Writ Petition No. 31741 of 1998 as referred to in the letter of the State Government dated 13.5.2011.

3. A further prayer has been made that a mandamus be issued directing the respondents not to alter the status of the petitioner’s land in dispute or transfer the same to any other agency. This apprehension has been expressed on the ground that the entire land which was subject matter of the order dated 7.4.1993, is sought to be handed over to NOIDA authority for allotment.

4. In view of the nature of the allegations made in the writ petition, this Court passed an order on 13.10.2011 calling upon the District Magistrate to explain as to why the impugned order dated 6.9.2011 be not treated to be a malicious order in the background of the case and as to why costs be not imposed in this regard. The order dated 13.10.2011 is reproduced hereunder :

“Heard Sri S.D. Kautilya, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.

This writ petition is another glaring example of executive insensitiveness of an ordinary litigant of this country.

The petitioner’s case is that he has never parted with his land, which was subject matter of proceedings against Pragatisheel Samuhik Sahakari Krishi Samiti Limited, which came to be finalized by the Apex Court after the dismissal of the special leave petition on 7.12.2010.

The main issue is that an order was passed on 7th of April, 1993 vesting the property in the State in a proceeding against the said Samiti. The petitioner moved an application for correction/modification of the said order on the ground that the petitioner’s land in dispute to the extent of the area claimed had been wrongly included in the proceedings and it was a pure arithmetical error. This error was sought to be rectified through the said application, which remained pending.

The application could not be disposed of on account of the pendency of the litigation of the aforesaid Samiti. The application came to be rejected in the year 1998 and one of the aggrieved persons namely Sohan had filed Writ Petition No. 44406 of 1997, which was disposed of on 6.1.1998 directing the authorities to consider the said grievance. The petitioner also challenged the order passed against him and the writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of on 22.9.2004, a copy whereof is Annexure 6 to the writ petition. The order passed against the petitioner dated 19.2.1998 was quashed.

The matter again remained pending on the pretext of the pendency of litigation of the Samiti. The petitioner’s application was again processed and the District Magistrate on 13.10.2008 without passing any order on the application of the petitioner consigned the file. The petitioner again approached the authorities and as a matter of fact, after the dismissal of the special leave petition, the petitioner approached the Collector, who in turn dispatched a letter on 7th of January, 2011 to the Principal Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh informing him that on the basis of the report, it appears that such applications as moved by the petitioner, are still pending and, therefore, appropriate directions s