2015 Supreme(UK) 86
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Alok Singh, J.
Gram Panchayat, Village Ajeetpur – Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Others – Respondents
WP (M/S) No. 238 of 2015
Decided On : 22.1.2015
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Brief Holder for Respondent-State.
Availability of alternative legal remedy under Section 122-B of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950, and the unwarranted nature of issuing a mandamus to evict the respondents without hearing them.
Headnote:
Gram Panchayat - Land Encroachment - U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950, Section 122-B
Fact of the Case:
The Gram Panchayat filed a petition seeking the removal of encroachment on Gram Sabha land. The petitioner argued that the respondents were in unauthorized possession of the land.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had an alternative remedy available under Section 122-B of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950, and issuing a mandamus to evict the respondents without hearing them was unwarranted.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court should issue a mandamus to evict the respondents without hearing them, considering the availability of an alternative legal remedy under Section 122-B of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided that since the petitioner had an alternative legal remedy available under Section 122-B of the Act, the issuance of a mandamus to evict the respondents without hearing them was unwarranted.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was advised to avail appropriate legal remedy before the appropriate forum.
Alok Singh, J.
1. Present petition is filed by the Gram Panchayat, Village Ajeetpur, Block Bahadarabad, Tehsil and District Haridwar seeking writ of mandamus commanding the respondent Nos. 1 to 3, i.e. Secretary Revenue, Dehradun, District Magistrate Haridwar and S.D.M. Haridwar to ensure that encroachment on the Gram Sabha land bearing Khasra No. 122-M, Village Ajeetpur, District Haridwar be removed forthwith.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 are in unauthorized possession of the Gram Sabha land bearing Khasra No. 122-M, therefore, Revenue Authorities should remove the encroachment from the Gram Sabha land by evicting respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 therefrom.
3. Section 122-B of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 reads as under:-
“122-B. Powers of the Land Management Committee and the Collector.- [(1) Where any property vested under the provisions of this Act in a Gaon Sabha or a local authority is damaged or misappropriated or where any Gaon Sabha or local authority is entitled to take or retain possession of any land under the provisions of this Act and such land is occupied otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act, the Land Management Committee or Local Authority, as the case may be, shall inform the Assistant Collector concerned in the manner prescribed.
(2) Where from the information received under sub-section (1) or otherwise, the Assistant Collector is satisfied that any property referred to in sub-section (1) has been damaged or misappropriated or any person is in occupation of any land, referred to in that sub- section, in contravention of the provisions of this Act, he shall issue notice to the person concerned to show cause why compensation for damage, misappropriation or wrongful occupation as mentioned in such notice be not recovered from him or, as the case may be, why he should not be evicted from such land.
(3) If the person to whom a notice has been issued under sub-section (2) fails to show cause within the time specified in the notice or within such extended time not exceeding thirty days from the date of service of such notice on such person, as the Assistant Collector may allow in this behalf, or if the cause shown is found to be insufficient, the Assistant Collector may direct that such person may be evicted from the land and may for that purpose, use, or cause to be used such force as may be necessary and may direct that the amount of compensation for damage, misappropriation or wrongful occupation be recovered from such person as arrears of land revenue.
(4) If the Assistant Collector is of opinion that the person showing cause is not guilty of causing the damage or misappropriation or wrongful occupation referred to in the notice under sub-section (2) he shall discharge the notice.
(4-A) Any person aggrieved by the order of the Assistant Collector under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) may, within thirty days from the date of such order prefer, a revision before the Collector on the grounds mentioned in clauses (a) to (e) of Section 333.
(4-B) The procedure to be followed in any action taken under this section shall be such as may be prescribed.
(4-C) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 333 or Section 333-A, but subject to the provisions of this Section-
(i) Every order of the Assistant Collector under this section shall, subject to the provisions of sub-sections (4-A) and (4-D), be final.
(ii) Every order of the Collector under this Section shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (4-D), be final.
(4-D) Any person aggrieved by the order of the Assistant Collector or Collector in respect of any property under this section may file a suit in a court of competent jurisdiction to establish the right claimed by him in such property.
(4-E) No such suit as is referred to in sub-section (4-D) shall lie against an order of the Assistant Collector if a revision is preferred to the Collector under sub-section (4-A