Anjani Kumar Mishra, J.

Heard Sri Triveni Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Manas Bhargava who appears for respondents 7 to 9 in the writ petition. I have also heard Sri Brij Kumar Yadav who appears for the Gaon Sabha.

2. Since, counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged, with the consent of the parties, the matter has been heard and is being decided finally.

3. The petitioner, by means of this writ petition has sought quashing of the order dated 22.04.2015 passed by the Board of Revenue and the order dated 13.07.2012 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Kanpur Nagar.

4. From the record, it transpires that a notice under Section 80 C.P.C. read with Section 106 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act was served by the contesting respondents on 27.01.2012.

5. The suit under Section 220 (9)-B, where from this writ petition arises, was filed on 13.02.2012. The plaint was accompanied by a stay application as also an application for waiver, regarding the period of notice provided under Section 80 C.P.C.

6. The contention of Sri Triveni Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the suit was registered on the same day, however no stay order was granted