The principles of natural justice require that a recorded tenure holder must be afforded an opportunity to be heard before their rights to land are altered or cancelled.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

1. Heard Mr. Bhola Nath Yadav, learned counsel assisted by Mr. Rahul Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sher Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for respondent-Gram Panchayat, Mr. S.K. Sharma, learned counsel for respondent no.8 and Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

2. Brief facts of the case are that Ganga Dhar son of Banshi Dhar filed a suit under Section 229 -B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act 1950 claiming bhoomidhari right over the plot No. 345 area 1.332 hectare and plot No. 826 area 0.006 hectare situated in Village Sithauli Pargana Islamnagar Tehsil Bisuali District Badaun. The aforementioned suit was decreed vide judgement and decree dated 9.9.1982. On the basis of aforementioned decree, Ganga Dhar was recorded as bhoomidhar of the plots in question in the revenue records. The appeal filed by State against the aforementioned judgement and decree was allowed vide judgement dated 19.4.1983 setting aside the judgement and decree dated 9.9.1982 and the suit was accordingly dismissed. The second appeal filed by Ganga Dhar was ultimately dismissed as abated in view of the provisions contained under Section 5 (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 hereinafter referred to as U.P.C.H. Act. The name of Ganga Dhar was recorded in the basic year of the consolidation operation. After the death of Ganga Dhar, his legal heirs executed a sale deed dated 17.10.2007 in favour of petitioner in respect to plot Nos. 345 and 826 accordingly petitioner became bhoomidhar with transferable rights of the plot Nos. 345 and 826 and remained in possession over the same. On the basis of sale deed dated 17.10.2007, the name of petitioner was recorded under Section 12 of U.P.C.H. Act in case No. 238. Respondent no.8 filed an application dated 24.9.2024 before the District Magistrate, Badaun. On the basis of aforementioned application of respondent no.8, reports were submitted by the consolidation authorities and a case has been registered under Section 9 A (2) of U.P.C.H. Act before Consolidation Officer Bisauli as case No. 0669 of 2024 State Vs. Rama Devi and Others. In the aforementioned case No. 0669 of 2024, an order dated 9.10.2024 has been passed by Consolidation Officer for expunging the name of Ganga Dhar/legal heir and their vendees from the plot in question as well as for recording the plot in question as naveen parti/Class-5 (1) Category plot. On the basis of the order dated 9.10.2024, another order dated 10.10.2024 was passed by Consolidation Officer in case No. 0670 of 2024 State Vs. Gram Sabha for cancelling the exchange ratio of the plot Nos. 345 and 826. Consolidation Officer passed another order under Section 4 2-A of U.P.C.H. Act in Case No. 0671 of 2024 State Vs. Smt. Manjul and Others taking out the plot No. 345 from the chak of the petitioner and recording the same as naveen parti plot. Hence Writ B No. 4339 of 2024 has been filed for the following relief:-

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and quashing the impugned order dated 9.10.2024 passed by Consolidation Officer Bisuali in the Case No. 0669 of 2024, State Vs. Rama Devi and others, under Section 9 A (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and quashing the entire proceeding of case No. 669 of 2024, State Vs. Rama Devi and others, under Section 9A (2) of U.P.C.H. Act