Back
2023 Supreme(All) 2500
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.
Dilawar - Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. And 3 Others - Respondents
WRIT C NO. 2111 OF 2023.
Decided On : 04-07-2023
For the Petitioner: Ratnesh Kumar Pandey
For the Respondent: C.S.C., Sunil Kumar Singh
Headnote:(A) U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1950 - Sections 154 (2)/167 (2) - Writ petition seeking a mandate to restrain interference in possession of land and urging for a timely decision on a pending application regarding land ownership - The court directed that the Collector, Gautam Budh Nagar, decide the pending application while allowing the impleadment of Gaon Sabha. (Paras 5, 6, 14)
(B) Legal Principle - The court emphasized the necessity for the application to be decided in accordance with law and with opportunity for parties to be heard, establishing that rectification applications are maintainable. (Paras 7, 10, 14).
Facts of the case:
Petitioner claimed rightful possession of land disputed in the proceeding initiated under the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act despite a prior order vesting said land in the State, which he contested through a pending application.
Findings of Court:
The Collector was directed to expeditiously consider the application filed by the petitioner.
Issues: The primary issues included the petitioner's claimed ownership and possession of land and the procedural validity of the Collector's previous order.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed the necessity for the Collector to address and decide the petitioner’s application in accordance with law, citing case law for guidance.
Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application to be allowed for impleadment. (Para 2 , 3 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. arguments regarding legality of previous orders. (Para 4 , 10) |
| 3. petitioner's claim of land ownership. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. order to decide pending application expeditiously. (Para 11 , 13) |
| 5. duty to decide application according to law. (Para 12 , 14) |
ORDER
Chandra Kumar Rai, J.
Order on C.M. Impleadment Application No.2 of 2023
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. In view of the facts mentioned in the application supported by the affidavit, the instant application is allowed.
3. Counsel for the petitioner is directed to implead the Gaon Sabha as respondent No.5 in the writ petition during the course of the day.
Order on Writ Petition
4. Heard Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Pandey, Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents and Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Counsel for Gaon Sabha.
5. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:
(i) issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus restraining the respondents from interfering in peaceful possession of the petitioner over the land in dispute belonging to Khasara No.573, situated in village-Soharakha Jahidabad, Tehsil and Pergana-Dadari, District-Gautam Budh Nagar in any manner, whatsoever, except in accordance with law till disposal of his application dated 19.02.2021 by the respondent No.2 with a further direction to the respondent No.2 to decide application of the petitioner dated 19.02.2021 filed in Suit No.03 of 1987-88, under Section 154 (2)/167 (2) of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. act, 1950 State v. Pragatisheel Samoohik Sahakari Samiti Ltd. within a time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.
(ii) issue, any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
6. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner is alleging himself to be bhumidhar in possession of the land belonging to khasara No.573, Area 02-17-0 situated in village Soharakha Jahidabad, Tehsil and Pergana Dadari, District-Gautambudh Nagar to the extent of his Share measuring about 1437 square yards/ 1201.47 square meters. Persons of the village have sold their land to Pragatisheel Samoohik Sahakari Krishi Samiti Ltd. Subsequently on the report of the Sub-Divisional Officer dated 25.06.1987, proceeding under Sections 154 (2)/ 167 (2) of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act was initiated by the Collector Gautam Budh Nagar, against the society, which was registered as suit No.03 of 1987-88 ( State v. Pragtisheel Samoohik Sahakari Krishi Samiti Ltd. ) before the Collector.
7. According to the petitioner, petitioner had not sold any portion of the land in dispute to the Society so there was no occasion for initiation of the proceeding under Sections 154 (2)/ 167 (2) of U.P.Z.A and L.R.Act against the petitioner. Collector Gautam Budh Nagar vide order dated 07.04.1993 passed an order in the aforesaid suit No.3 of 87-88 vesting the land in the State Government from the date of execution of the sale deed. Counsel for the petitioner further mentioned in paragraph No.7 of the petition that inspite of their best efforts, the petitioner or their power of attorney could not get copy of the order dated 07.04.1993 passed by the Collector. In paragraph No.9 of the writ petition, it is further mentioned that petitioner and his co-sharers are still in possession over the land in dispute. On 11.11.2020 on application of Lekhpal, the case crime No.0944 of 2020 was registered at Police Station-Sector 49, Gautam Budh Nagar, Under Section 447 of the I.P.C. and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 against ten persons of the village. An application dated 19.02.2021 supported by affidavit was filed by the petitioner before the respondent No.2 with the prayer for correction in the order dated 07.04.1993 passed by the Collector, Gautam Budh Nagar. On the basis of the aforesaid application dated 19.02.2021, order w
