Advocates:
['K N MISHRA', 'C S C', '', 'A K SRIVASTAV', 'ASHISH KUMAR SRIVASTAV', 'V K SINGH', 'AVINASH CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA']

AFR

Court No. - 52

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 68155 of 2006

Petitioner :- Prem Singh

Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- K.N. Mishra

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.K.Srivastav,Ashish Kumar Srivastav,V.K. Singh

Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

1. Heard Sri K.N. Mishra, counsel for the petitioner, standing counsel for

respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Sri Avinash Chandra Srivastava, counsel for

the Land Management Committee.

2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner was granted agricultural lease

of the land which was declared surplus under the U.P. Imposition of

Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The lease was granted in favour of

the petitioner in the year 1983 and on the basis of the lease, the

petitioner was given possession of the allotted land and the name of the

petitioner was accordingly recorded in the revenue records. The

petitioner remained in possession of the disputed land and his name was

recorded in the revenue records and due to operation of law, petitioner

became bhumidhar with transferable rights vide order dated 25.2.1997 in

respect to land which was allotted to the petitioner in the year 1983. One

Gyan Singh who has no locus in the matter, has filed a time barred

revision under Section 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act against the

order dated 25.2.1997, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, declaring

the petitioner as bhumidhar with transferable rights. The revision was

heard by the revisional court and the same was ultimately dismissed by

the order dated 18.4.2002, although the observation was made in the

same order of dismissal that the authorities will inquire the matter with

respect to correction of the revenue entries of the plot in dispute. On the

basis of the order dated 18.4.2002, proceeding was initiated under

Sections 33/39 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act and the entry of the

petitioner has been expunged vide order dated 24.7.2002 on the ground

that the lease was not executed in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner

challenged the order dated 24.7.2002 in revision before the Board of

Revenue and the same was dismissed vide order dated 7.12.2005,

hence this writ petition.

3. This Court while entertaining the writ petition has passed an order

dated 2.2.2016 which is as follows:-

"Heard Sri K.N.Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned standing counsel for the respondents.

While assailing the impugned order, learned counsel for the

petitioner contends that once the respondents have admitted

execution of lease in favour of the petitioner and granted right of

Bhumidhar with transferable right in year 1997 it was not open for the

respondents to expunge the name of the petitioner from the revenue

record. Prima facie, I find substance in the submission of the learned

counsel for the petitioner.

Matter requires scrutiny.

Issue notice.

Notices on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 4 have been accepted by

the office of the learned chief standing counsel. Learned counsel for

the petitioner understands to serve a copy of the writ petition upon

Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for

respondent no.5 within 48 hours, therefore, notice need not be

issued to respondent nos. 1 to 5. Let notice be issued to respondent

no.6 by registered post returnable at an early date. Steps be taken

within two weeks.

The respondents are directed to file counter affidavit within six

weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.

List thereafter showing the name of Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastava as

counsel for the respondent."

4. In pursuance of the order dated 2.2.2016, the gaon sabha has filed

counter affidavit and the petitioner has filed rejoinder affidavit.

5. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was granted

agricultural lease in respect of the plot in dispute in the year 1983 and no

proceeding for cancellation of petitioner's lease has been