Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24584 of 2019 Petitioner :- Amrit Lal And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nisheeth Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Diwakar Singh
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard Shri Nisheeth Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Diwakar Singh for the Gaon Sabha, respondent no. 5.
By means of this writ petition, the three petitioners seek quashing of the orders dated 27.11.2018 being Annexures 6, 7 and 8 to this writ petition, passed in separate cases against the respective petitioners under Section 67 (2), by the Tehsildar, ordering their eviction from land of the Gaon Sabha in their unauthorized possession, along with damages.
Also impugned are Annexures 9, 10 and 11, which are extracts of RC Form 21 maintained in accordance with Rule 67(8) of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules 2016, the register showing amounts order to be realized on account of damages and compensation awarded in proceedings under Section 67 of the Code. They have been issued by the Assistant Collector/Tehsildar, Soraon, Allahabad for execution of the orders for eviction and for recovery of damages imposed upon the petitioners, in the proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. They are in effect warrants of execution.
The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, instituted against them have been decided prior to the dates fixed in the matters and therefore, without adequate opportunity of hearing.
The second submission of counsel for the petitioner is that their eviction is protected under Section 67-A of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which provides that if a house exists on 29 November, 2012 over land referred to in Section 63 of this Code, which land is not reserved for a public purpose, the site thereof shall be settled with the owner of the house, on such terms and conditions as my be prescribed.
I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
The challenge in the writ petition is to the orders passed by the Tehsildar directing eviction of the petitioners and imposing damages among them and also to the consequential warrants for the execution of the aforesaid orders.
Against the orders for eviction passed on 27.11.2018, which orders have been passed by the Tehsildar under Section 67(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, the petitioners have a statutory alternative remedy of an appeal before the Collector, under Section 67 (5) of the Code. This statutory alternative remedy has not been availed by them. The submissions that are being made on behalf of the petitioners can be adequately dealt with by the appellate court.
Under the circumstances and since a statutory alternative remedy exists, this Court does not consider it appropriate to entertain the writ petition. No challenge to the warrants of execution, independent of the orders to be executed is liable to be entertain, being entirely consequention proceedings.
The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed on the ground of availability of a statutory alternative remedy.
The petitioners, in case, so advised may avail the alternative remedy available to them, for redressal of their grievances.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 Mayank