IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.
Mohabbat Ali - Petitioner
Versus
Nagar Panchayat Piran Kaliyar and Another - Respondents
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2268 of 2023
Decided On : 28-08-2024
Licensing - Weekly Haat Bazaar - Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act 1916, Section 241; Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act 1910, Section 143 - The court interpreted the provisions regarding licensing for commercial use of land and the necessity of declarations under the Zamindari Act, ultimately ruling that non-declaration does not prevent the operation of the bazaar.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash a license rejection for running a weekly haat bazaar, claiming the land was suitable for commercial use despite being agricultural. The Nagar Panchayat imposed conditions for a No Objection Certificate (NOC), including a declaration under the Zamindari Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the condition requiring a declaration under Section 143 of the Zamindari Act was unnecessary for the petitioner to operate the bazaar, as non-declaration would not bar the operation.
Issues: Whether the condition for a declaration under Section 143 of the Zamindari Act is necessary for the petitioner to run the weekly haat bazaar.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that if a declaration under Section 143 is not sought, the land is deemed excluded from the provisions of the Zamindari Act, allowing the petitioner to operate the bazaar without such declaration.
Result: The condition requiring a declaration under Section 143 is struck down, allowing the petitioner to run the haat bazaar.
JUDGMENT :
Ravindra Maithani, J.
By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:-
(ii) to issue writ, order in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.1 to grant license to the petitioner in terms of Section 241 of Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act 1916 on the application moved by the petitioner 19.08.2022 (contained as Annexure No.2 to the writ petition).
(iii) Issue any other Writ, Order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case; and
(iv) Award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioners.”
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. It has been the case of the petitioner that he has been running a weekly haat bazaar for the last 10 years on Khasra No.310 and 311, area 0.0720 and 0.9930 hectares situated in revenue village, Mehmudpur, Mustakam, which was recorded in the name of the petitioner as Bhumidar with transferable rights.
4. In the year 2019, Nagar Panchayat was established in the area. Therefore under Section 241 of the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916, the petitioner applied for license to run the weekly haat bazaar, but no action was taken on it. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Writ Petition (M/S) No.2781 of 2022, Mohabbat Ali Vs. Nagar Panchayat, before this Court (“the petition”). In the petition, on 24.02.2023, an interim order was passed and the petitioner was permitted to hold weekly haat bazaar over the land subject to payment of license fees at the rate of Rs.500 per day. Subsequent to it, the license was rejected on multiple grounds by the respondent no.1, Nagar Panchayat Piran Kaliyar on 16.03.2023. It is impugned herein.
5. Nagar Panchayat has filed its objections. In view of the development that took place during pendency of the petition, the detail objection need not be noted. Fact remains that on 17.05.2024, No Objection Certificate (“NOC”) was granted by the respondent no.1, Nagar Panchayat, to the petitioner subject to five conditions, one of which is condition no.4, which is as follows:-
6. The petitioner is not aggrieved by other conditions imposed by the respondent no.1 on 17.05.2024 for grant of NOC. He is aggrieved by the condition no.4 with regard to declaration under Section 143 of the Act.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that declaration under Section 143 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1910 (“the Act”) is not at all required and it does not create any hindrance for the petitioner in running the haat bazaar. He would submit that at the most, if such declaration is not sought and the land is used for purposes other than agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry, which includes pisciculture and poultry farming, the land shall not be governed by the provisions of the Act. Therefore, it is argued that the condition no.4 in NOC dated 17.05.2024, issued by the respondent no.1 is liable to be struck down.
8. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the petitioner has not sought declaration under Section 143 of the Act. Therefore, unless such declaration is sought, the NOC issued on 17.05.2024 by the respondent no.1 shall not come into force and the petitioner is under obligation to seek such declaration.
9. In fact, earlier also, on 16.03.2023, when the respondent no.1 rejected the grant of license to the petitioner, one of the grounds was that the land being agricultural is proposed to be used for commercial purposes.
10. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the petitioner is required to seek declaration under Section 143 of the Act. This is so as to ensure the public safety. He would also submit that such declaration is also necessary so as to ensure that the lan
Non-declaration under Section 143 of the Zamindari Act does not prevent the use of land for commercial purposes, as it is deemed excluded from the Act's provisions.
A declaration under S.143 is required to alter the status and rights of a Bhumidhar, and until such declaration is made, the original rights under the Act remain intact.
The court affirmed that unauthorized occupants who built houses before the cut-off date are deemed legal owners, hence cannot be evicted despite the claims of land ownership by the appellants.
The provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 apply to land let out for non-agricultural purposes, and without a declaration under Section 143, the Civil Court la....
The central legal point established is the determination of the applicability of the U.P. Public Premises Act and the UPZA&LR Act to the disputed land, based on their definitions and relevant notific....
Regulatory authorities cannot arbitrarily deny building permits without valid statutory reasons, especially when ownership rights are undisputed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.