Advocates:
['M R GUPTA', 'C S C', '', 'ANUJ KUMAR', 'BHUPENDRA KUMAR TRIPATHI']

AFR

Reserved on 07.12.2022

Delivered on 19.12.2022

Court No. - 30

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 22149 of 2000

Petitioner :- Murali

Respondent :- A.D.M.Finance And Revenue And Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- M.R.Gupta

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anuj Kumar

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

1.

This writ petition has been instituted to quash the

order dated 25.04.2000 passed by Additional District

Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Ghazipur by which the

revision was accepted and the lower court's order dated

11.07.1991 was quashed and it was held that gata

no.13/4kha area 0-6-0 hectare is the Gram Panchayat land

from which the petitioner was evicted and Rs.720/- as

damages and Rs.5/- as execution fee were imposed.

2.

The Court already heard Sri M.R. Gupta, learned

counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jitendra Narayan Rai,

learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondent

no.1.

3.

The petitioner has taken ground and has mentioned

the facts that a notice (annexure-1) under Rule

115-A/Form 49-A of UPZA and LR Rules was issued to the

petitioner regarding plot no.13/4 area 0-6-9 dismal

situated in Village Kazipur, Pargana, Tehsil and District

Ghazipur by Assistant Collector First Class, Ghazipur. The

petitioner filed objection (annexure-2) under Section 122-

B of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land

2

W

RIT

-C No.22149 of 2000

Reforms Act, 1950¹ and under Rule 115-C of the Uttar

Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules,

1952² stating that over the plot in suit the petitioner's

house, trees, naad, khoota and charan are standing since

the period of zamindari. In evidence dated 06.04.1991

(annexure-3) lekhpal admitted that house is 50 years old

and trees are 40-45 years old and there are nad, khoonta

and charan which were also in the disputed land.

Tehsildar, Sadar by his order dated 11.07.1991 (annexure-

4) dismissed the case giving finding that he has also made

inspection and the house his more than 50 years old and

nad, khoonta, charan and trees of the petitioner are there

and he is living since more than 50 years.

4.

Respondent no.1 giving perverse finding allowed the

revision vide order dated 25.04.2000 (annexure-5). As per

intekhab, khatauni (annexure-6) the petitioner is a

marginal farmer having only .680 area of land. If the

impugned order dated 25.04.2000 is not quashed the

petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and injury. Hence,

the petition be allowed and impugned order be quashed

and the writ of mandamus be also issued directing the

respondent not to dispossess the petitioner from the

property in suit.

5.

All the papers referred in the petition are annexed by

the petitioner. No counter affidavit has been filed by the

respondents. The petitioner is Yadav by caste. He has

annexed only one extract of khatauni from which it is

1

The Act, 1950

2

The Rules, 1952

3

W

RIT

-C No.22149 of 2000

disclosed that an area 0.680 hectare is recorded in the

name of petitioner but no other paper like question-

answer has been filed to establish that except the

aforementioned area of land the petitioner is not the

owner of any other land. If the petitioner is marginal

farmer and he comes under the category of priority, any

land not belonging to public utility land of the village

panchayat can be allotted to him but neither proposal for

allotment of patta of the property in suit has been made in

favour of the petitioner nor any patta has been executed

in his favour as per law.

6.

It is admitted to the parties that the property in suit

khasra no.13/4 is Gram Panchayat banjar land. According

to the petitioner there is naad, khoonta, charan, hut,

trees, house and khalihan of the petitioner for more than

50 years and the petitioner is living there for more than

50 years but the Lekhpal has deposed that the petitioner

has illegally occupied the