Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—Petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 31.8.2010 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Shohartgarh, district Siddharth Nagar and the revisional order thereto dated 11.8.2011 passed by the Commissioner, Basti Division, Basti.

2. The impugned orders direct for expunging the name of the petitioner from the revenue records in respect of plot No. 198, area 3 Biswa 12 Dhoor situate in village Patthardeiya, Tappa Deorua, Pargana and Tehsil Shohartgarh, district Siddharth Nagar in exercise of power under Section 33/39 of the United Provinces Land Revenue Act, 1901 (hereinafter referred to as the “Revenue Act”)

3. The case of the petitioner is that the aforesaid plot was leased out to him by the Land Management Committee on 17.8.1992. The petitioner was granted Assami lease. It was not for a specified period.

4. I have heard Sri Tripathi B.G.Bhai, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Anuj Kumar for respondents.

5. The first submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that as no period has been specified in the lease granted to the petitioner, it has to be treated as a perpetual lease and the respondents cannot expunge the name of the petitioner without cancelling the lease under Section 198(4) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). Secondly, no order could have been passed against the petitioner without following the procedure prescribed under Sections 201 and 202 of the Act and without notice to him.

6. On behalf of respondents, it has been submitted that the Assami lease is always for a limited period and with the expiry of the lease period it automatically stands determined and, there is no need of passing any order cancelling the same. On the expiry of the lease period the land reverts to the Gaon Sabha and, as such, the impugned orders directing for deleting the name of the petitioner and recording that of the Gaon Sabha are perfectly legal. The service of notice would have been an empty formality and non-issuance of notice does not, in any way, vitiates the order.

7. In paragraph 3 of the writ petition, the petitioner has admitted that his name pursuant to the lease granted by the Land Management Committee was recorded in Khatauni in Class - 3 which means that he was granted an Assami lease. The petitioner has annexed a certificate issued on the application of the petitioner himself, by the Tehsildar, Shohartgarh, dated 18.8.1992 as Annexure - 1 to the writ petition. It certifies states that the petitioner was granted Assami lease by the Land Management Committee vide resolution dated 16.1.1991 and the same was approved by the Sub-Divisional Officer on 30.3.1991. Thus, from the above admission of the petitioner and the certificate of the Tehsildar it is certain that the petitioner was granted an Assami lease of the land in question.

8. The first question which falls for consideration is about the tenure of the Assami lease granted to the petitioner.

9. The copy of the lease deed, if any, executed pursuant the allotment is not on record. The certificate of the Tehsildar referred to above is also silent about the period of lease.

10. Section 197 of the Act authorises the Land Management Committee to admit any person as Assami on land falling in Section 132 of the Act with the previous approval of the Assistant Collector-in-charge of the sub-division. ‘Assami’ has been described under Section 133 of the Act and it includes every person admitted by the Land Management Committee as a lessee of the land described in Section 132 of the Act, on or after the date of vesting.

11. Admittedly, petitioner has been admitted as Assami after the date of vesting by the Land Management Committee. He has not acquired rights as Assami in any other manner. Therefore, his admission as Assami is over land of public utility as detailed