Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 137656 (ALL)

CONSOLIDATION COMMITTEE, PARGANA PASCHIM RATH, TEHSIL BIKAPUR THRU. PRESIDENT/PRADHAN, GRAM SABHA v. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, FAIZABAD AND OTHERS

CMRAD/65/2025 · 2025-05-02

Saurabh Lavania

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25897 Court No. - 7 Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION DEFECTIVE No. - 65 of 2025 Applicant :- Consolidation Committee, Pargana Paschim Rath, Tehsil Bikapur Thru. President/Pradhan, Gram Sabha Opposite Party :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Faizabad And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohan Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned State Counsel. 2. The present review application has been filed with regard to a detailed judgment dated 28.03.2024 passed in Writ – B No. 386 of 1998 (Constitution Committee and Another Vs. D.D.C. Faizabad and Others) presented in the Registry of this court on 29.04.2025 along with application for condonation of delay. 3. The Registry has reported that the review application was within time up to 27.04.2024 and accordingly the Registry has reported a delay of 366 days in filing the instant review application. 4. The explanation to condone the delay of 366 days has been given in the affidavit dated 28.04.2025 sworn by Prabhashankar, Village Pradhan, Village Para Brahmnan, Milkipur, Ayodhya. The relevant paras of the affidavit are quoted hereunder:- "4. That the opposite party no.2 Mata Prasad after getting the copy of judgment and order dated 28.03.2024 approached the authorities for the implementation of the same and when it came to the knowledge of the members of the Gaon Sabha, they approached the deponent and the effect of the same was also discussed and as such a meeting of the Gaon Sabha was held on 18.06.2024 at Panchayat Bhawan under the presidentship of the deponent and ultimately it was resolved that the judgment and order dated 28.03.2024 is adversely affecting the villagers at large and for the inconvenience being caused in the interest of the villagers the application for review is required to be filed and a resolution to prefer the review application was passed on 18.06.2024 and the deponent was authorized to file the review application through panel lawyer of the Gaon Sabha before this Hon'ble Court. Copy of the resolution dated 18.06.2024 with its typed copy is attached herewith as Annexure No.1 to this affidavit. 5. That thereafter the deponent who was suffering from Chronic Arthritis was faced with severe pain and was unable to move properly and remained under treatment wherein he was advised complete bed rest from 20.06.2024 to 30.01.2025 but due to cold season remained further bed ridden upto 1st week of March, 2025, as such in furtherance of the resolution he could not approach this Hon'ble Court at that time. Copy of the medical report of the deponent dated 15.02.2025 with its typed copy is attached herewith as Annexure No.2 to this affidavit. 6. That the deponent remained bed ridden upto first week of March, 2025 and only after recovery and being able to move properly contacted the counsel of the Gaon Sabha who advised the deponent to get the certified copy of the judgment and order dated 28.03.2024 as well as the paper book to enable him to prepare the review application. 7. That for purposes of obtaining the certified copy of the order dated 28.03.2024, application/folio was got filed by the deponent on 10.03.2025 and the certified copy has been issued on 23.04.2025." 5. To establish the averments made in para 5 & 6, a medical certificate has been placed on record. Further to establish that the applicant was a critical patient of Arthritis and on account of the same he was advised bed rest, no document has been placed on record. The certificate on record is neither of a Government Hospital nor of a specialist doctor of the concerned ailment. The certificate provided is issued by an B.M.S.(Ayurvedic) doctor namely Ramchandra Shukla, B.M.S. 6. In view of the aforesaid, this Court finds that the explanation given in the affidavit filed by the applicant/ petitioner for condoning the delay, which is of 366 days, in filing the application is completely misconceived. 7. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay (I.A. No 1 of 2025) is rejected. Consequently, the application for review of order 28.03.2024 is also rejected. Order Date :- 2.5.2025 (Manoj K.) Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench