2025 Supreme(All) 2277
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SAURABH LAVANIA, J.
Jodharam - Appellant
Versus
D.D.C., District Hardoi And Others - Respondents
Writ B No.287 of 2025
Decided on : 04-04-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Devendra Pratap, Shashank Shekhar Singh
For the Respondent: C.S.C., Dilip Kumar Pandey
Land classified as 'Usar' under statutory provisions does not confer bhumidhari rights, as affirmed by the court's interpretation of relevant laws.
Headnote:(A) U.P. Consolidation Act, 1953 - Section 40(1) - U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Section 132 - Writ petition seeking to quash an order regarding land rights - The court found that the land in question was classified as 'Usar', which does not confer rights to the petitioner - The statutory provisions clearly exclude such lands from bhumidhari rights. (Paras 5, 9)
(B) Land Rights - The court reaffirmed the principle that rights cannot accrue to land classified under specific statutory exclusions, emphasizing the importance of statutory definitions in determining land rights. (Paras 6, 9)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to quash an order concerning land situated at Village Musnakheda, asserting rights over certain plots classified under the U.P. Consolidation Act and U.P. Zamindari Abolition Act, which was denied based on statutory exclusions.
Findings of Court:
The court found no illegality in the impugned order, affirming that the petitioner had no rights over the land designated as 'Usar' for plantation purposes.
Issues: The key issues included the nature of the land in question and the applicability of statutory provisions regarding land rights.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the land's classification under Section 132 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition Act precluded the petitioner from claiming bhumidhari rights.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court hears arguments and dispenses notice. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petition seeks to quash an order under u.p. consolidation act. (Para 3) |
| 3. discussion on relevant statutory provisions affecting land rights. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. statutory definitions and conditions regarding land use. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 5. court finds no illegality in the impugned order. (Para 9) |
| 6. writ petition dismissed with costs made easy. (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT :
Saurabh Lavania, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record.
2. In view of order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to the private-respondent(s), if any, is hereby dispensed with.
3. The instant petition has been preferred seeking following main relief:-
"(i) ISSUE a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to quash the impugned order dated orders dated 17.10.2024, passed by O.P. No. 1 in Revision No.83/2024, case no.0052/2018 (Kallu versus Jodharam and others) under Section 40(1) of the U.P. Consolidation Act, 1953, concerning Gata No. 814, Miljumla/area 0.2202 hectare; Gata No. 1135/2, area 0.1592 hectare; Gata No. 1135/3, area 0.0075 hectare; and Gata No. 1131/2, Miljumla/area 0.1548 hectare. The disputed land is situated at Village Musnakheda, Majra Kasimpur, Tehsil Sandila, District Hardoi. Annexed in annexure No.1 of this writ petition."
4. The impugned order dated 17.10.2024 is extracted herein below :-

5. From the impugned order, quoted above, it is apparent that in the present writ petition the issue relates to Section 132 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 (in short "Act, 1950") as the land in relation to which the petitioner is claiming rights is the land covered under Section 132 of the Act, 1950, which is Gata No. 814M/0.2202 Hectare, Gata No.1135/2/0.1592 Hectare, Gata No.1135/3/0.0075 Hectatre and this fact has not been refuted.
6. Section 132 of the Act, 1950 is quoted herein below :-
"132. Land in which [bhumidhari] rights shall not accrue. Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 131, but without prejudice to the provisions of Section 19, [bhumidhari] rights shall not accrue in -
(a) pasture lands or lands covered by water and used for the purpose of growing singhara or other produce or land in the bed of a river and used for casual or occasional cultivation;
(b) such tracts of shifting or unstable cultivation as the State Government may specify by notification in the Gazette; and (c) lands declared by the State Government by notification in the Official Gazette, to be intended or set apart for taungya plantation or grove lands of a [Gaon Sabha] or a Local Authority or land acquired or held for a public purpose and in particular and without prejudice to the generality of this clause-
(i) lands set apart for military encamping grounds;
(ii) lands included within railway or canal boundaries;
(iii) lands situate within the limits of any cantonment;
(iv) lands included in sullage farms or trenching grounds belonging as such to a local authority;
(v) lands acquired by a town improvement trust in accordance with a scheme sanctioned under Section 42 of the U.P. Town Improvement Act, 1919 (U.P. Act V11 of 1919) or by a municipality for a purpose mentioned in Clause (a) or Clause (c) of Section 8 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 (U.P. Act VII of 1916); and (vi) lands set apart for public purposes under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (U.P. Act V of 1954).]"
7. Sub Section 2 of Section 3 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in short "Act, 1953"), being also relevant, is extracted herein under :-
"3.Definitions.- In this Act unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context -
(1) X X X (2) "Consolidation" means re-arrangement of holdings in a unit amongst several tenure-holders in such a way as to make their respective holdings more compact];
Explanation. - For the purpose of this clause, holding shall not include the following:
(i) Land which was grove in agri