JUDGMENT : SALIL KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Vivek Saran on behalf of respondent No. 5 is taken on record. 2. A certified copy of the order dated 6.9.2018 passed by Tehsildar, Kanpur Dehat has been handed over by the learned counsel for respondent No. 5, which is taken on record. 3. In pursuance to the order dated 14.9.2018 passed by this Court, the Tehsildar, Tehsil-Derapur, District-Kanpur Dehat is present personally before this Court and has been identified by the learned Standing Counsel and has submitted his affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay in implementing the order dated 4.5.2009 passed under Section 122-B of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as, 'Act, 1950'), whereby respondent No. 5 was held to have illegally occupied the Gaon Sabha plots and continued to illegal occupy the same despite the restoration application filed by respondent No. 5 having been dismissed on 25.9.2012. The same is also taken on record. 4. It has been stated in the affidavit that the present Tehsildar joined his post on 23.6.2018. It is evident from the records that the subsequent restoration application filed by respondent No. 5 was allowed by the present Tehsildar on 6.9.2018 and the order dated 25.9.2012 has been recalled. Consequently, the proceedings instituted against respondent No. 5 under Section 122-B of the Act, 1950 have revived. 5. It would serve no purpose to keep the writ petition pending, and therefore, it is directed that the proceedings instituted against respondent No. 5 under Section 122-B of the Act, 1950 read with Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 shall be decided within a period of three months from today. In case the allegations of the petitioner are found to be true the Assistant Collector shall ensure that the encroachments over the Gaon Sabha land are removed within a period of one month thereafter unless the order of Assistant Collector is stayed by any superior authority or court in any appeal or revision filed against the order of Assistant Collector. In case the allegations of the petitioner are found to be true the Assistant Collector shall ensure that the encroachments over the Gaon Sabha land are removed within a period of one month thereafter unless the order of Assistant Collector is stayed by any superior authority or court in any appeal or revision filed against the order of Assistant Collector. It is also directed that, if the petitioner or any other member of the Gaon Sabha files an application in the case registered before the Assistant Collector, to be heard in opposition to the noticee in the said cases, the Assistant Collector shall afford a reasonable opportunity to the said persons to oppose the defence, if any, taken by the noticee. 6. It is clarified that this Court has not adjudicated upon the merits of the claim as raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition. 7. Before parting with the case, it would be relevant to note that the initial order under Section 122-B of the Act, 1950 was passed in 2009, but the same was not implemented and subsequently respondent No. 5 filed a restoration application in 2012, which was also dismissed on 25.9.2012. The subsequent restoration application, which has been allowed by the concerned Tehsildar, was filed on 17.8.2018. A perusal of the order dated 6.9.2018 shows that the said order is a very cryptic order and the same has been passed without considering the delay in filing the subsequent restoration application and whether the subsequent restoration application filed by respondent No. 5 was bonafide. However, the Court refrains from making any further comments on the merits of the order dated 6.9.2018 inasmuch as the same gives an opportunity to respondent No. 5 to contest the proceedings under Section 122-B of the Act, 1950. The petitioner shall be at liberty to challenge the merits of the order dated 6.9.2018 passed by the Tehsildar before the appropriate forum. However, it is apparent from the chronology of events that the respondent revenue authorities, for reasons best known to them, were sitting tight and took no action to remove the illegal encroachments over Gaon Sabha plots and to implement their own orders passed under Section 122-B of the Act, 1950. 8. However, it is apparent from the chronology of events that the respondent revenue authorities, for reasons best known to them, were sitting tight and took no action to remove the illegal encroachments over Gaon Sabha plots and to implement their own orders passed under Section 122-B of the Act, 1950. 8. In the circumstances, the District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat is directed to take appropriate action, in accordance with law, against the erring Revenue Officers posted in Derapur, Kanpur Dehat, who were responsible for the delay in implementing the order dated 4.5.2009 passed under Section 122-B of the Act, 1950. 9. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.