The established rights of a party should not be undermined by arbitrary state actions or prolonged restoration proceedings, especially when prior orders have not been set aside.

JUDGMENT

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

Heard Mr. Akhtar Ali, holding brief of Mr. Arun Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. R.C. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Sher Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.4/Gram Sabha.

2. With the consent of the parties, matter is being heard and disposed of without inviting counter affidavit.

3. Brief facts of the case are that plot number 38/3 area 0.194 hectare situated in Village-Chatdang @ Baldevpur, Pargana, Tehsil and District-Pilibhit was initially recorded in the name of Gaon Sabha as Navin Parti. Petitioner belongs to schedule caste community/ category and was landless agricultural labourer. Petitioner remained in possession over the plot No.38/3 accordingly petitioner was granted benefit of Section 122 -B(4F) of U.P.Z.A.&L.R. Act vide order dated 20.07.2010 as such petitioner was recorded as bhumidhari with non-transferable right in Class- 6(2) Category. Petitioner applied for recording his name as bhumidhar with transferable right, after expiry of required period, which has been rejected by the impugned order dated 24.03.2023 passed by UP-Ziladhikari, Tehsil-Sadar, District-Pilibhit. Revision filed by the petitioner under Section 210 of U.P.Revenue Code, 2006, has been also dismissed vide order dated 24.05.2023, hence this writ petition on behalf of the petitioner challenging the order dated 24.03.2023, passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, District-Pilibhit and order dated 24.05.2023 passed by Additional Commissioner (Administration) Bareilly Division, Barelilly.

4. This Court vide order 26.09.2023 has passed the following order:

"1. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was granted benefit of Section 122-B (4-F) of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act by the authority vide order dated 20.7.2010. He further submitted that order dated 20.7.2010 has attained finality and petitioner was recorded as bhoomidhar with non-transferable rights. He further submitted that petitioner initiated proceeding for recording the petitioner as bhoomidhar with transferable rights which has been refused on misconceived ground that proceeding for cancellation of lease is pending. He submitted that revision filed by the petitioner has also been dismissed in arbitrary manner.

2. Mr. Govind Kumar Saxana, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents is granted two weeks time to obtain instruction on the point as to whether the petitioner can be refused the relief for declaring him as bhoomidhar with transferable rights when the order by which the petitioner was given benefit under Section 122-B (4-F) of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act has attained finality.

3. Put up this matter as fresh on 13.10.2023. "

5. Again on 13.10.2023 the Court has granted time to State to obtain instruction in the matter.

6. In compliance of the order of this Court dated 13.10.2023, Mr. R. C. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent has placed instruction dated 06.11.2023 before the Court, which is taken on record.

7. Mr. R.C. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents on the basis of the instruction submitted that State has filed a restoration application dated 28.02.2023 against the order 20.07.2020 after thirteen years, which has been registered as Restoration Case No. T 202312560102096 and next date fixed in the matter is 14.11.2023. He further submitted that petitioner's prayer for recording his name as bhumidhar with transferable right shall be