Cancellation of an agricultural lease based on time-barred complaints is legally impermissible, emphasizing adherence to statutory time limits as per U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

1. Heard Mr. Ashutosh Singh, Advocate holding brief of Mr. L.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Anjani Kumar Chaurasia, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for respondent- Gram Sabha.

2. The name of complainant/ respondent no.3, Bhrigu Singh has been deleted on the basis of application filed on behalf of the petitioners.

3. Brief facts of the case are that petitioners along with others were granted agriculture lease in view of the Family Planning Scheme of the Government in respect to plot No. 208 and 205 situated at Village Majhauna, Pargana Sikanderpur Garvi, Tehsil Rasra, District Ballia which was recorded as naveen parti in the revenue records. The lease executed in favour of petitioners was approved by Sub Divisional Magistrate on 26.12.1986. The possession of the plot in question was delivered in favour of the petitioners in the year 1986- 87. One Bhrigu Singh filed a complaint in the year 2000 in respect to the lease executed in favour of petitioners and on the basis of aforementioned complaint, the case No. 570 of 2000 was registered under Section 198 (4) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 hereinafter referred to as U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. The show cause notice was issued by Additional District Magistrate to the petitioners accordingly petitioners filed their objection in the matter. The Additional District Magistrate vide order dated 24.9.2001 rejected/ dismissed the proceeding under Section 198 (4) of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. Against the order dated 24.9.2001, Bhrigu Singh filed a revision before the Commissioner which was registered as revision No. 69/B-2001 under Section 333 of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. The aforementioned revision was heard and allowed by Commissioner/ respondent no.2 vide order dated 15.3.2002 cancelling the lease executed in favour of petitioners. Against the order dated 15.3.2002 petitioners filed a revision before respondent no.1/ Board of Revenue which was dismissed by Board of Revenue vide order dated 9.5.2012. Hence this writ petition filed on behalf of the petitioners for the following reliefs:-

"(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned judgement and order dated 9.5.2012 passed by respondent no.1, Board of Revenue U.P. at Allahabad in revision No. 189 of 2001-02 Shrimati Chandradeiya and Others Vs. Bhrigu and Others and also dated 15.3.2002 passed by Commissioner/ respondent no.2 in revision No. 570 of 2000 Shri Bhrigu Vs. Smt. Chandradeiya and others.

(ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their allotted land in pursuance of impugned judgement and order dated 9.5.2012 in revision No. 189 of 2001-02 Shrimati Chandradeiya Vs. Bhrigu and others passed by respondent no.1/Board of Revenue."

4. During pendency of the writ petition, counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Gram Sabha in the matter although no order was passed by this Court for filing counter affidavit since 2012.

5. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners were granted lease on the basis of Scheme initiated by the Government for family planning in the year 1986-87. He further submitted that petitioners came in possession over the allotted land in the year 1986-87. He submitted that proceeding for cancellation has been initiated after 13 years by one Bhrigu Singh and Additional District Magistrate has rejected/ dismissed the proce