Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:93305 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16863 of 2025 Petitioner :- Surendra Nath Dubey And Another Respondent :- Additional Commissioner Judicial (Second) And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Harsh Srivastava,Manish Counsel for Respondent :- Ashwini Kumar Srivastava,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi,C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard Shri Manish, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Shri Ashwini Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent No.5. Perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed seeking following relief :- "Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 22.3.2025 passed by Additional Commissioner Judicial (Second) Varanasi Division, Varanasi (Respondent No.1) (Annexure No.1 to this writ petition) as well as order dated 24.07.2025 & 16.07. 2015 passed by Deputy Collector, Saidpur, Ghazipur (Respondent No.2) (Annexure no.2), So, justice may be done." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that in a suit under Section 176 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, petitioners, who were the defendants in the suit, appeared on 1.6.2015 and sought time to file W.S. On 15.6.2015, the suit was dismissed for want of prosecution. On 9.7.2015, an application was moved by the plaintiffs - respondents for recalling the order dated 15.6.2015. Order date 15.6.2015 was recalled by order dated 10.7.2015 passed by the Trial Court. The order dated 10.7.2015 was passed without even issuing notices to the petitioners, who have already put in appearance on 1.6.2015. After restoring the suit, no fresh notices were issued to the petitioners and the suit was ultimately decreed by judgment and decree dated 16.7.2015. Final decree was passed on 24.7.2015. Petitioners filed restoration application on 30.7.2015. The said application has been rejected by order dated 16.8.2016. Revision filed by the petitioners against the said order has been dismissed on 22.3.2025. Against the final decree dated 24.07.2015, the petitioner filed revision no. 1803 of 2016 and the same has been dismissed by order dated 22.03.2025. 4. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that once the defendants have appeared in the suit and the suit is dismissed for want of prosecution before restoration of the suit, notice is necessary to the defendant. Suit has been restored without even issuing notices to the petitioners. Even if suit was restored, fresh notices were required to be issued to the defendants after restoration. Admittedly, no such exercise was done by the Court below and straightaway within six days, preliminary decree decree was passed and then within next ten days, final decree was passed by the respondent authority. Restoration application filed by the defendants, which was within time, has been rejected and the revision has been dismissed against the order rejecting the restoration application. The revision filed against the final decree which was ex-parte against the petitioner has also been dismissed by order dated 22.03.2025. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.5 could not counter the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners and also could not explain as to the manner the authorities have proceeded and decreed the suit. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this writ petition and the orders may be set aside and the matter may be remanded to the Trial Court to decide the aforesaid application, afresh, expeditiously. 6. In view of the above, the orders dated 22.3.2025 passed by Additional Commissioner Judicial (Second) Varanasi Division, Varanasi - respondent No.1 as well as order dated 16.07.2015 & 24.07.2015 passed by Deputy Collector, Saidpur, Ghazipur - respondent No.2, are hereby quashed. 7. The writ petition is allowed with direction to respondent No.2 to decide the suit filed by the respondents under Section 116 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, afresh, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably, within six months, after ensuring service of notice upon all the respondents and providing opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties as well as opportunity to lead reasonable evidence in support of their case provided there is no other legal impediment. Order Date :- 30.5.2025 Ved Prakash (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad