Authorities must adhere to statutory provisions and consider beneficial legislation in eviction proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code.

JUDGMENT

Rajeev Misra, J.

Heard Mr. Rajnish Tripathi, the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for Respondents 1,2,3,4 and Mr. H.N. Singh, the learned counsel representing respondent 5, Gram Sabha.

2. Perused the record.

3. At the very outset, the learned counsel for petitioner submits that he be permitted to correct the description of Respondent 3 in the cause title of the writ petition as well as the stay application.

4. Prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner is bona-fide. Same is not opposed by the learned Standing Counsel as well as the learned counsel representing respondent 5.

5. In view of above, prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner is allowed.

6. Accordingly, the learned counsel for petitioner is permitted to amend the cause title of the writ petition/stay application during course of the day.

7. Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 04.08.2023 passed by Respondent 4, Tehsildar/Assistant Collector (First Class), Tehsil-Maitha, District-Kanpur Dehat in Case No. 1679 of 2022 (Gaon Sabha v. Lakshmi Devi), under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) as well as the order dated 16.11.2023 passed by the appellate authority i.e. Respondent 2, District Magistrate/Collector, Kanpur Dehat in Case No. 1117 of 2023 (Lakshmi Devi v. Gaon Sabha), under Section 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) whereby aforementioned appeal filed by petitioner against order dated 04.08.2023 has been dismissed.

8. Record shows that the dispute relates to Survey Plot No. 533, area 0.166 hectares which is recorded as Naveen Parti in the revenue records. The Halka Lekhpal submitted his report (R.C. Form-19) dated 06.07.2022 alleging therein that petitioner is in illegal possesion and occupation over part of (113.70 sq. mtrs) of Survey Plot No. 533 area 0.166 hectares. After receipt of aforementioned report, accordingly proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 came to be registered against petitioner as Case No. 1117 of 2023 (Gaon Sabha v. Lakshmi Devi), under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. Resultantly, notice (R.C. Form-20) in terms of Section 67(2) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was issued to petitioner asking him to show cause, why an order of eviction be not passed against petitioner and further why damages be not imposed against petitioner for causing damages to Gaon Sabha land on account of illegal possession and occupation. In response to the said notice dated 22.07.2022, the petitioner duly appeared and filed his objections dated 27.07.2022. The Halka Lekhpal, who had submitted his report dated 06.07.2022 on the basis of which, the proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 were drawn also appeared before Respondent 4, Tehsildar/Assistant Collector (First Class), TehsilMaitha, District-Kanpur Dehat and proved the report so submitted by him. The Halka Lekhpal was cross examined by the learned counsel for petitioner before Respondent 4, Tehsildar/Assistant Collector (First Class), Tehsil-Maitha, District-Kanpur Dehat. However, nothing adverse could be culled out in the examination in chief of the Halka Lekhpal. Respondent 4 further contended that the land in dispute is recorded as Gaon Sabha land and the petitioner has failed to establish his right, titile and interest over the same. The basis of the possession of the petitioner over the Gaon Sabha land also could not be established. As such, petitioner is in illegal possession and occupation of Gaon Sabha land. Ultimately, upon perusal and evaluation of the material on record and the submission made, Respondent 4, Tehsildar/Assistant Collector (First Class), Tehsil-Maitha, District-Kanpur Dehat came to the conclusion that petitioner is in illegal possession and occupation over part of Gaon Sabha land (area 0.0072 hectares). Respondent 4, Tehsildar/Assistant Collector (First Class), TehsilMaitha, District-Kanpur Dehat. Consequently, Responden