The court reinforced that administrative decisions must consider ongoing civil proceedings and legal injunctions, ensuring maintainability assessments align with established legal provisions.

JUDGMENT

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

Heard Mr. Vineet Kumar Singh, Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Counsel for respondent no.4, Land Management Committee.

2. Brief facts of the case are that plot No.682/745 area 0.0890 Hectare (old plot No.576/6) situated at Village - Haldauni, Teshil - Dadri, District Gautam Buddh Nagar is recorded as abadi - class 6-2 and plot No.684/746 area 0.2530 Hectare situated in the aforementioned village is recorded in the name of primary school, class 6-3. Copy of the khatauni has been annexed as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition. Petitioner's father initiated proceeding under Section 9 A(2) of the U.P.C.H. Act in respect to disputed plot No. 684/746 with the prayer that the same may be recorded as abadi in the place of banjar, however, dispute has been decided against the petitioner's father but review application filed on behalf of the petitioner is pending before this Court against the judgment of Writ Court. Another proceeding under section 28 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act 1901 initiated the instance of the petitioner's father for correction of map is pending before the Revisional Court under section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. One Public Interest Litigation No. 3515 of 2018 filed by Tahir Ali for removal of encroachment in respect to plot No.684/746 area 0.2530 Hectare is pending before this Court. Proceeding under section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was initiated against the petitioner and his brothers in respect to plot No. 684/746 area 0.450 hectare and order for ejectment and damages has been passed on 7.7.2021 alleging to be ex party against the petitioner and his brothers. Petitioner and his brothers challenged the order dated 7.7.2021 by way of restoration application which was rejected vide order dated 7.4.2022. Petitioner along with his brothers challenged the orders in appeal before the Collector which was allowed vide order dated 28.5.2022 on cost of Rs. 15000/- setting aside the order dated 7.7.2021 as well as 7.4.2021 and the matter was remanded back before the Tahsildar to decide the proceeding under section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties. Petitioner and his brothers filed an application dated 19/20.8.2022 before Tahsildar regarding maintainability of the proceeding under section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 as disputed plot is not Gram Panchayat property. Tahsildar, vide order dated 19.9.2022, rejected the application dated 19/20.8.2022 and fixed the case for evidence and hearing. Petitioner challenged the order dated 19.9.2022 in appeal under section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 which has been dismissed by Additional District Magistrate, vide order dated 10.10.2023. Hence, this writ petition for following relief :-

"issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 10.10.2023 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Gautam Buddha Nagar in Appeal No.1212 of 2022 (Manoj v. Land Management Committee) (Computerized Case No.D202211270001212) under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and the impugned order dated 19.09.2022 passed by the Tahsildar (Judicial), Tehsil Dadri, Gautam Buddha Nagar in Case No. RST/25478/2021 (Computerized Case No. T202111270205478) (Land Management Committee v. Gajendra and Others) under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (Annexure Nos.18 and 16 to the writ petition)