IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Sangeeta Chandra, Brij Raj Singh, JJ.
Smt. Binu Devi - Petitioner
Vs.
State Of Uttar Pradesh Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Uttar Pradesh Govt. Lko. And Others - Respondent
WRIT - C No. - 4036 of 2024
Decided On : 06-05-2024
SUCCESSION - Fisheries Lease Rights - Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code - Sections 106, 108, 148; Rules of 2016 - Rule 59 - The court interpreted Sections 106, 108, and 148 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, establishing that a widow has succession rights to her deceased husband's fisheries lease. The court emphasized that the absence of a provision for succession in the rules does not negate the widow's rights under Section 108, which governs the general order of succession for male bhumidhars, asamis, and government lessees. The court's decision was influenced by previous judgments affirming these rights, leading to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to succeed to the leasehold rights.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition after the Sub-Divisional Magistrate refused to accept her rent payment for a fisheries lease following her husband's death. The lease was valid until 2029, and the petitioner sought to assert her rights as the widow of the deceased lessee.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner, as the widow of the deceased lessee, is entitled to succeed to the fisheries lease rights under Section 108 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code. The court noted that there was no evidence of lease violation or cancellation, and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate's refusal was contrary to established legal principles.
Issues: Whether the petitioner has the right to succeed to her deceased husband's fisheries lease under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, and whether the Sub-Divisional Magistrate's refusal to accept rent payment was lawful.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that under Section 108 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, a widow has succession rights to her deceased husband's leasehold rights, and the absence of explicit succession provisions in the rules does not negate these rights. The court reaffirmed that the lease remains valid and enforceable until properly cancelled following due process.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, directing the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to recognize the petitioner's succession rights and to process her rent payment without taking coercive action against her until a decision is made.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel who appears for the State Respondents and Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4.
2. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers:-
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding and directing the respondent no.3 i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sandila, Hardoi to allow the petitioner to deposit the rent of year of 2023 and 2024 in respect of pond in question as per the lease deed.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding and directing the respondent no.3 i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sandila, Hardoi to consider the case of petitioner and decide the representation dated 01.04.2024, sent by the petitioner, contained as Annexure No.5 to this writ petition, within the period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
3. It is the case of the petitioner that her husband had taken fisheries lease over Gata No. 763 area 1.4700 hectare, situated at Village - Baheriya, Pargana-Godwa, Tehsil-Sandila, District- Hardoi on 03.01.2019. The lease deed was executed between the husband of the petitioner and the Revenue Authorities on 22.01.2019 for a period of ten years (03.01.2019 to 02.01.2019) and the said fisheries lease is also registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Sandila. The possession of the aforesaid pond was delivered to the petitioner's husband and he started do fishing therein, but he died unfortunately on 01.06.2022 leaving the petitioner and three sons & two daughters as dependents. The petitioner went to the office of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hardoi for paying rent for the year 2023 but the concerned official has refused to accept the rent saying that the lease was allotted to her husband and after the death of the allottee, the lease is likely to be cancelled. The petitioner has approached the respondents no. 2 by sending an application on 01.04.2024 by registered post, but no heed has been paid, and therefore, this writ petition has been filed with the aforesaid prayers.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon several orders passed by the Hon'ble Single Judges in various writ petitions of similarly situated persons. The judgements rendered by Hon'ble Writ Court have been collectively filed as annexure-6 to the petition.
5. Learned Standing Counsel for the State on the basis of instructions sent by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hardoi states that there is no provision in the Rules framed under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code for giving succession rights on fisheries lease allotted on ponds of Gaon Sabha under Section 106 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code. The consequences of the transfer made by an asami in contravention of the Code are mentioned and the petitioner's husband was a lease holder/asami and since there is no provision for succession the petitioner is liable for eviction from Gram Sabha property.
6. The instructions further mention Section 148 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code which prescribes that an allottee has to strictly follow the conditions of allotment and since there is no such condition in the allotment letter or transfer of lease on the basis of succession, the petitioner cannot be treated as successor of her husband. Reference has also been made of Section 108 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code which relates to general order of succession to male bhumidhar or asami or Government lessee.
7. This Court has gone through section 108 which provides for general order of succession to male bhumidhar, asami, Government lessee
A widow is entitled to succeed to the fisheries lease rights of her deceased husband under Section 108 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, despite the absence of specific succession provisions in the ....
Court affirmed that without a valid lease, petitioners are not entitled to fisheries rights, allowing for ejectment and damages under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
Gram Panchayat property - Members and officers not to acquire interest in contract - Section 28-C has been inserted with an object to protect property of Gram Panchayat so that persons who are in a p....
The eligibility criteria for fishery lease allotment as per Rule 57 of U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 must be met for a valid allotment.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.