Revisional court findings affecting rights under Section 76(dd) of U.P. Revenue Code are legally erroneous if made prior to trial, and procedural fairness in land disputes is essential.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

1. Heard Sri Chandra Shekhar Agnihotri, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned standing counsel for the state- respondents and Sri Achal Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-gaon sabha.

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

3. Brief facts of the case are that the father of the petitioner was granted assmi lease in the year 1977 in respect to plot no.874, area 0.022 hect; plot no. 875/1, area 0.235 hect; plot no. 875/2, area 0.044 hect and plot no.875/3, area 0.02 hect. (total area 0.303 hect.). The consolidation proceeding intervened in the village in question and village was denotified under Section 52 of the U.P. C.H. Act on 20.2.2006. The names of the petitioners remained recorded in the consolidation records. The copies of khatauni as well as C.H. Form Nos. 41 & 45 have also been annexed along with the writ petition as Annexure Nos.3 & 4. During consolidation operation, the plots number were changed and new numbers were allotted, i.e., plot no. 1017, area 0.303 has been allotted. Proceeding under Section 202 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act has been initiated in the year 2011 which has been registered as Case No.167 under Section 202 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act before the Assistant Collector, 1st Class/S.D.O., Mau, Chitrakoot which was decided by the S.D.O. vide order dated 6.4.2011, expunging the petitioners' entry and the land was ordered to be recorded as banjar in the records. Against the order dated 6.4.2011, revision was filed on behalf of the petitioners before the Commissioner which has been registered as Revision No.112/2024 (Computerized Case No.C202407000000112) before the Addl. Commissioner, Chitrakoot Dham, Chitrakoot. The aforementioned revision was heard and allowed in part, setting aside the order dated 6.4.2011 and remanding the matter back before the S.D.O. to decide the proceeding under Section 202 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act afresh, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties, within 3 months. Hence, this writ petition has been filed for the following relief:-

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 25.10.2024, passed by the Additional Commissioner in Case No.112/2024 (Computerized Case No.C202407000000112) and the order dated 6.4.2011 passed by the Assistant Collector, 1st class/Sub Divisional Officer, Mau in Suit No.177, under Section 202 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act and to drop the entire proceedings initiated against the petitioners."

4. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners' father was granted assami lease in the year 1977 and on the basis thereof, the petitioners ' father was recorded in the revenue records. He further submitted that during consolidation proceeding, the petitioner remained recorded over the plot in question. It is further submitted that on the basis of ex parte report, entry of the petitioners has been expunged without any notice/opportunity to the petitioners in the proceeding under Section 202 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act. He submitted that the revision filed by the petitioners has been allowed and the matter has been remanded back but the observation made along with the remand order by the revisional court is wholly illegal, as such, the finding/observation made by the revisional court while remanding the matter before the trial court is liable to be set asid