IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 604 of 2009 (M/S) Sri Vinod Goel ……… Petitioner Versus Sri Sushil Chandra Sabbarwal & Another ……… Respondents June 11, 2009 Mr. Sharad Sharma, Sr. Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Lokendra Dobhal, Advocate for the respondents. HON’BLE DHARAM VEER, J. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 17.4.2009 passed by the Additional Chief Revenue Commissioner, Dehradun in Revision No. 84/2008-09 during the pendency of the present writ petition annexed as Annexure No. 9 to the writ petition. 2. Issue an appropriate order or direction to the court below to allow the petitioner’s application dated 6.3.2009 annexed as Annexure No. 8 to the writ petition. 3. Issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. 4. Award the cost of the petition.” 2. Revision of the petitioner against the order dated 25.11.2008 of the Assistant Collector, 1st Class, Dehradun is pending before the Additional Chief Revenue Commissioner, Uttarakhand, Dehradun. Petitioner had filed an application dated 6.3.2009 in the aforesaid revision with the prayer that the records of suit no. 12/2003-04 under Section 28 of the Land Revenue Act between the same parties be summoned. Petitioner had also prayed for adducing some additional evidence on the record. 3. After hearing the counsel for the respective parties, the court below rejected the aforesaid application of the petitioner vide the impugned order dated 17.4.2009. Hence, the present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 5. Learned Counsel for the respondents stated at bar that the respondents have no objection if the additional evidence of the petitioner is taken on record and in summoning the records of the case no. 12/2003-04 by the court below and the present writ petition may be allowed to this extent. Averments to the aforesaid effect have also been made in para 31 of the counter affidavit. 6. Considering facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the above statement made by learned Counsel for the respondents, the present writ petition deserves to be allowed. Resultantly, the impugned order dated 17.4.2009 is hereby set aside. The court below is directed to summon the records of the case no. 12/2003- 04 under Section 28 of the Land Revenue Act and to take on record the additional evidence as mentioned in the affidavit of the petitioner dated 6.3.2009. 7. The writ petition is allowed accordingly without any order as to costs. (Dharam Veer, J.) 11.06.2009 PRABODH