Court NO.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) 4757/2001 (Old No. 37644/1993) Nirasta Ram ………..Petitioner Versus Addl. District Magistrate/Collector, Hardwar & Others …………Respondents Sri Sharad Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Ser H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 30th July, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma. J. Proceedings under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act were initiated against the petitioner which was contested by the petitioner by filing objection to the effect that he has not encroached upon any land of Gaon Sabha. An ex parte order was passed by the respondent no. 2/Tehsildar/Assistant Collector 1st Class, Hardwar on 20.11.1992. Petitioner filed recall application seeking recall of the order dated 20.11.1992, which was allowed on costs vide order dated 2.1.1993. Subsequently on 17.2.1993, the order dated 2.1.1993 was withdrawn on the ground that the petitioner did not pay the cost and order dated 20.11.1992 was made effective although petitioner alleged that he had deposited the cost. Petitioner filed an application to recall the order dated 17.2.1993, which was rejected on 30.3.1993 for want of prosecution. Application to recall the order dated 30.3.1993 was also rejected on 26.4.1993. 2. Revision preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 26.4.1993 was also rejected by the respondent no. 1 on 26.8.1993. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case narrated above, impugned orders are liable to be set aside as it is settled law that the parties shall be allowed to contest on merit. Accordingly writ petition is allowed. Impugned orders dated 20.11.1992 and 26.4.1993 and 26.8.1993 are hereby set aside. Matter is remanded back. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 30.7.2008 Prabodh