IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION No. 226 OF 2003 (MS) Kirnu S/o Late Sri Dharampal R/o Village Sarai, Pargana-Jwalapur, District-Hardwar & four others ……… Petitioners Versus State of Uttaranchal through Collector, Hardwar & six others …Respondents Dated: 2nd March, 2009 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. Heard Sri Tapan Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Lok Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ashish Joshi, learned brief holder for respondent nos.1 to 3 and Sri Bhuvnesh Joshi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for respondent nos.4 to 6. None is present for the respondent no.7 though service is reported to be sufficient. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the orders dated 22.11.2002 (Annexure no.9) and 23.12.2002 (Annexure No. 10) and further to remand the matter to the revisional court. The petitioners have filed this writ petition with the averments that Lat3 Sri Dharampal (father of the respondent nos.1, 2, 3 & 4 and the husband of respondent no.5) had filed a suit under section 229 B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 before the Assistant Collector, Ist Class, Hardwar and the same was decreed in favour of Sri Dharampal vide order dated 4.11.1993 passed by the Assistant Collector, Ist Class, Hardwar. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order dated 4.11.1993 the respondent No.7 (Gram Sabha Sarai) filed an appeal bearing no. 14/1992-93 before the court of Commissioner, Meerut Division that was dismissed by additional Commissioner (J), Meerut Division vide his order dated 27.7.1994. On 3.6.1999, the respondent nos.4, 5 and 6 moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 and 151 C.P.C. before the court of Assistant Collector Ist Class, Hardwar with the prayer to set aside the order dated 4.11.1993. On this application, Assistant Collector Ist Class, Hardwar vide his order dated 15.01.2001 passed an order to set aside the order dated 4.11.1993 and the suit was restored to its original number. Feeling aggrieved by the said order dated 15.01.2001, the petitioners filed the revision before the court of commissioner, Garhwal Mandal. That on 22.11.2002, the same revision bearing no.ZA 10/2000-2001 was dismissed for want of prosecution by the Commissioner, Garhwal Mandal. Against that order the petitioners moved the restoration application with the prayer to set aside the order-dated 22.11.2002. That application was also rejected by the Commissioner, Garhwal Mandal on 23.12.2002. Feeling aggrieved by the said orders dated 22.11.2002 and 23.12.2002; the petitioners have filed the present petition before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the revisional court has not decided the revision on merits. He further submitted that the petitioners could not appear in the court due to some unavoidable circumstances and their counsel also could not appear in the court as he was busy in some another case. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that he has no objection if the matter is remanded to the revisional court. In the above circumstances, having considered submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the material available on record, it is expedient in the interest of justice to set aside the orders dated 22.11.2002 and 23.12.2002 passed by Commissioner, Garhwal Mandal. For the reasons recorded above, the petition is allowed. The orders dated 22.11.2002 and 23.12.2002 passed by the commissioner, Garhwal Mandal, are set aside. The matter is remanded to the court of Commissioner, Garhwal Mandal to decide the matter on merits after giving proper opportunities of hearing to counsel for both the parties. (Dharam Veer, J.) 02.03.2009 RG