Heard Sri Shashi Nandan, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri S.R. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State and its authorities respondents.
Petitioner is Lekhpal, posted at Galand Tehsil Ghoulana, District Panchsheel Nagar (Hapur). He has been suspended through order dated 16.6.2012 which is challenged through this writ petition and is contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition. The allegation against the petitioner is that he gave false report so that names of private person could be entered as Bhoomidhar over gaon sabha land which consisted of pond grave yard etc. and that he filed report of possession on the basis of alleged allotment of 1989 after 22 years even though the name of the alleged allottees was not recorded in the revenue record.
There is absolutely nothing wrong in the impugned suspension order.
However, the documents annexed along with the writ petition disclose a horrible state of affairs and confirm the view of this Court taken in several cases that Gaon Sabha/State property particularly in districts Gautam Budh Naga, Ghaziabad and Meerut is being looted with active assistance of revenue officers on large scale. In this regard reference may be made to a judgment given by me reported in Dina Nath Vs. State of U.P. 2009 (108) R.D. 321, relevant paragraph of the said authority are quoted below:
"10. If the Collector finds that no patta was executed in 1968 and Ram Roop and his family members usurped the property of the Gaon Sabha on the ground that prior to 1969, he was Pradhan, then stern action must be taken/ recommended to be taken against the C.O. who passed the order on 12.02.1997. Collector may also reopen all such cases in the District in which Gaon Sabha property was mutated in the name of private persons in the similar manner. If patta is executed, then immediately name of the allottee is mutated in the revenue records. Few months delay in getting the names mutated in the revenue records on the basis of pattas is understandable but few decades or few years delay is not at all understandable.
11. The experience of the Court is that during consolidation proceedings, Consolidation Authorities/ Officers liberally donate the Gaon Sabha properties to influential/ resourceful persons by passing such orders as has been passed in the instant case.
12. Accordingly, all the Collectors of all the Districts in the State are directed to reopen such cases where names of private persons are entered in revenue records on the basis of old pattas or adverse possession over Gaon Sabha land and correct the illegality by taking suo motu action. However, no orders shall be set aside without issuing notice and hearing affected persons. If notice through registered post is not served then it may be served through publication in the newspaper also. If it is found that some Consolidation Officer or S.O.C. or D.D.C. has done similar thing, then the action must be proposed to be taken against him also.
13. Supreme Court has held that fraud vitiates even most solemn proceedings vide Mahboob Sahab Vs. Syed Ismail and others, AIR 1995 SC 1205 (Para-9), United India Insurance Company Vs. Rajendra Singh, AIR 2000 SC 1165 and A.V. Papaya Sastry Vs. Government of A.P. and others, AIR 2007 SC 1546 (Para-39)."
The said judgment was challenged before the Supreme Court in the form of SLP(Civil) SC 4398 of 2010 Dina Nath Vs. State. The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP on 29.3.2010 by holding that "The learned Single Judge could see through the game of Ramroop and like and dismissed the writ petition by recording the following reasons" and thereafter quoted almost my entire judgment in inverted commas and approved the same. A similar matter has recently been decided by me pertaining to Ghaziabad on 1.3.2012. The said judgment is reported in U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Vs. Lajja Ram 2012 RJ 777 para 30 of the said authority is quoted below:
"Accordingly, it is held that whenever a person comes along with the case that Gaon Sabha land was allotted to him or some order was passed by any Court in his favour declaring his right over Gaon Sabha land or some revenue entry was in his favour long before but during last several years his name is not recorded in the revenue records then an irrebuttable presumption amounting to almost conclusive proof must be drawn to the effect that allotment order or entry is forged."
In the instant case it appears that there is a racket involving even higher officers to usurp the State/Gaon Sabha land. It is alleged that some land was allotted by the Gaon Sabha in the year 1989 copy of proceedings of land management Committee is Annexure 2-B to the writ petition. In the said resolution itself it is mentioned that the land is entered in the revenue record as pond and grave yard, however, it was not being used as such. It is quite apparent that no such allotment was made for the reason that the name of none of the allottees (there appears to be 10 allottees) was ever entered in the revenue record. It is inconceivable that after getting allotment of prime land allottees will not make any effort to get their name mutated. Order of approval of S.D.O. of 30.5.1989 also appears to be quite forged and manufactured after several years and antedated for the same reason i.e. in case allotment had been made and approved then allottees would have got their names recorded in the Revenue Records.
What is shocking is that this fraud has got judicial seal also. S.D.O./Assistant Collector Ist Class Hapur decided a case bearing no.8/9 of 2002 Raghuraj Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and others under Section 229 B of U.P.Z.A.L.R. Act on 9.7.2003 copy of the said order is Annexure 5 to the writ petition. The name of the officer is not legible. It is quite baffling that in the order dated 9.7.2003 it is mentioned that the plaintiffs case was that land was allotted in the year 1989 to the mother of the plaintiff, however, she died in 1986 and plaintiffs were in possession, but, State authorities tried to interfere in their possession and thereafter on inquiry and perusal of revenue record it was found that land was entered as Jauhar (pond). In spite of it through the said order declaration was granted in favour of the plaintiffs. The S.D.O. who passed the said order is directly responsible for the usurpation of the State/Gaon Sabha Land. The Court wonders how plaintiffs possession could be held without there being any entry in the revenue record and without there being any allegation that any effort to get the name entered in the Revenue record was made. In the order dated 9.7.2003 it is mentioned that Lekhpal admitted the possession of the plaintiff. The S.D.O. Hapur did not even bother to consider as to how pond or grave yard could be allotted. The said order is most important link in chain of fraud. The said order is non est in the eye of law.
The petitioner present Lekhpal on the basis of the said order gave the report in favour of other persons also who were not plaintiffs in the said suit (decided by order dated 9.7.2003). This can simply be termed as wonder of wonders. Some persons filed application before Deputy Collector Hapur District Ghaziabad/ S.D.M. on 21.4.2011. He directed that report must be filed. The petitioner Lekhpal gave the favourable report which was approved by Revenue inspector Dhhaulana and SDM-H approved that and directed for correction of record. Revenue Inspector Dhhaulana who approved petitioner's report and S.D.M.-H who passed the order are part of the racket. They are either themselves land mafias or are hand in glove with the land mafias who are usurping valuable Government land.
The Supreme Court in Bongaigaon Refinary and P.C. Ltd. Vs. Girish Chandra Sarmah A.I.R. 2007 S.C. 2860 has held that if disciplinary proceedings are to be initiated on the ground that a committee took an illegal/malafide decision then it is not permissible to initiate the proceedings against only one member of the Committee and action shall be taken against all the members of the committee .Accordingly, I find it utterly illegal that only petitioners Lekhpal who appears to be a link in the chain/racket of land mafias has been singled out. It is therefore directed that Revenue Inspector, Dhhaulana, who approved the report of present Lekhpal on 10.5.2011 and the S.D.M.-H who approved the same and directed correction in the Revenue record on 11.6.2011 shall immediately be suspended. The present Lekhpal, Revenue Inspector and S.D.M.-H have done something which is seldom heard of. On the basis of alleged allotment of 1989 merely by executive order without issuing any notice to the Gaon Sabha or the State pond etc. has been allotted by simply mentioning that mutation was not done due to some reason. The fraud and loot of State property is of the same level as was in the judgment of U.P. Awas Vikas Parisad decided by me (supra). Similarly the S.D.O. who decided case no.8/9 of 2002 on 9.7.2003 and the Lekhpal who gave the statement in the said case must also be immediately suspended. If the name of any person was mutated in the revenue record on the basis of judgment dated 9.7.2003 the same shall also be deleted and those persons must be evicted and damages @ of Rs.25000/- per hectare per year shall be realised from them by the Collector as arrears of land revenue.
In the aforesaid judgment of U.P. Awas Vikas Parishad (2012 RJ 777) in the end I directed that Public Interest Litigation should be registered and collector of both the Districts (Ghaziabad and Gautam Budh Nagar) should be directed to submit the report. Para 33 of the said authority is quoted below:
"During arguments in these appeals learned counsel for the appellant stated that Sri Moti Goel son of Lajja Ram plaintiff in one of the suits who also appeared as witness in the said suit had usurped various Gaon Sabha properties of District Ghaziabad and Gautam Buddh Nagar. Accordingly, it appears to be a fit case where a public interest litigation (P.I.L.) should be registered and Collectors of both these Districts should be directed to submit the reports regarding those cases where similar things happened and Gaon Sabha properties were usurped by unscrupulous persons and those cases where properties had been acquired/ resumed, these persons managed to get the compensation."
Now area in question is in District Panchsheel Nagar (Hapur). Collecor, Hapur is directed to submit a compliance report in respect of compliance of the directions given in this judgment in the public interest litigation which has been registered pursuant to my judgment dated 1.3.2012 Civil Misc. writ petition no.14834 of 2012. Any person who is found in possession of the land alleged to have been allotted in the year 1989 through Annexure 2 B to the writ petition to the persons whose names are given below shall immediately be dispossessed:
Giriraj Son of Sipahi Kela widow of Shankar Ratan Lal son of Tirkha Jeetpal son of Gajraj Shakuntala wife of Arjun Roopwati wife of Mahendra Rajesh wife of Dharmveer Agar Singh son of Ishak Lal Smt. Dharmwati wife of Harsaran Smt Surajwati wife of Surendra Even though a direction is not issued still Collector concerned is at liberty to lodge F.I.R. if he considers it appropriate against concerned person including the officers/officials who obliged them.
Suggestion:-
As the land of Ghaziabad, Gautam Budh Nagar, Panchsheel Nagar (Hapur) has become extremely valuable and as for industrial and residential purposes land in those districts is urgently required and as the courts are constantly restricting the scope of acquisition of the properties belonging to private persons/bhoomidhars hence the best solution is that the State shall resume the entire gaon sabha land in these districts under Section 117(6) of U.P.Z.A.L.R. Act. This will serve two purpose one the land illegally occupied by private person through active support by officers will be taken back. Chances of further manipulation and usurpation will not be there, secondly lot of land will be available without having recourse to land Acquisition Act for Industrial Development including construction of residential colonies.
Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Copy of this order shall be sent by the Registrar General to Chief Secretary and Collector Panchsheel Nagar (Hapur).
Office is directed to supply a copy of this order free of cost to Sri S.P. Misra, learned standing counsel for immediately sending the same to Chief Secretary and Collector Panchsheel Nagar within three days.
Order Date :- 17.7.2012 vkg