Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

1. The case is taken up through video conferencing.

2. Heard Shri Nitin Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent no.1 and 2 as well as Shri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.13 and perused the record.

3. The instant writ petition has been moved by the petitioner (defendant) praying to issue a writ for mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 i.e. S.D.M. Colonelganj to expeditiously dispose of the restoration application bearing No. 418 of 2008 in the Suit No. 45 under Section 229-B/176 of U.P.Z.A & L.R. Act (Jaisu Singh and others vs. Junglee Singh and others) dated 18.07.1977, Village Aata, Pargana Gwarich, Tehsil Tarabganj, District Gonda, within the time stipulated fixed by this Court in accordance with law.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the abovementioned Suit No. 45 under Section 229-B/176 of U.P.Z.A & L.R. Act was decided exparte against him in the year 1977 and the restoration application for recall of that order was moved by the petitioner in the year 2008 bearing restoration application no. 418 of 2008, but till now the said restoration application has not been disposed of causing inconvenience as well as serious prejudice to the petitioner and thus, suitable direction be given to the respondent no.2 to dispose of the above restoration application within the time stipulated by this Court.

5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent no.1 and 2 as well as Shri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.13 fairly submits that they are not having any objection if any direction pertaining to expeditious disposal of the recall application pending before the respondent no.2 is given. However, the petitioner and other parties be also commanded to co-operate in the early disposal of the recall application.

6. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the order intended to be passed by this Court, issuance of notice to private respondent no. 3 to 12 is hereby dispensed with as any direction pertaining to the early/time-bound disposal of the restoration application would also be in the interest of the private respondents.

7. Thus, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, no fruitful purpose shall be served keeping the instant petition and the same is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no.2 i.e. S.D.M. Colonelganj to consider and finally decide the above mentioned case expeditiously within a period of three months from the date of an authenticated copy of this order is placed before the authority concerned, strictly in accordance with law, subject to cooperation of the parties.

8. It is made clear that this Court has not considered the merits of the case.

9. In view of the recent surge in Covid-19 cases and having regard to the fact that the Court is working virtually, it is directed that the parties may file a computer generated copy of this order, which may be downloaded from the official website of this Court, after self attesting it by learned counsel for the parties before the authority concerned. The concerned court/authority/official shall be further under duty to verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order so filed by the parties from the official website of this Court and shall make a declaration that the same is verified.