Court No. - 22
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 11102 of 1999 Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar And Another Respondent :- Board Of Revenue And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prakash Chandra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.K.Rai,B.C.Rai,S.N.Singh
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
Heard Sri S.P. Saroj, Advocate holding brief of Sri Prakash Chandra, counsel for the petitioners and Sri Deepak Kumar Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri B.C. Rai, counsel for the respondent no. 13 as well as the Standing Counsel representing respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3.
The petitioner filed Case No. 26/92-93 under Section 229- B of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1950') against the contesting respondents and in the aforesaid case impleaded the Government of Uttar Pradesh through Collector, Muzaffarnagar as defendant no. 10 and the Nagar Palika, Muzaffarnagar through its Chief Executive Officer as defendant no. 11. The suit was decreed by the Additional Collector Class-I, District Muzaffarnagar vide his judgment and decree dated 5.2.1993. Against the judgment and decree dated 5.2.1993, the respondent no. 13 filed Appeal No. 10/1993 under Section 331 of the Act, 1950 which was allowed by the Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Meerut Division, District Meerut vide his judgment and order dated 1.12.1993 and the matter was remanded back to the trial court to pass fresh orders in Case No. 26/92-93 after impleading the State of Uttar Pradesh as a party in the said case. While passing the aforesaid order, the Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Meerut Division, District Meerut relied on Section 60 read with Section 10 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Area Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1956') and the judgment of the Board of Revenue reported in Triloki Nath vs Laxmi Narain 1979 AWC (69). Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 1.12.1993, the petitioner filed Second Appeal No. 37 of 1993-94 before the Board of Revenue which was dismissed vide order dated 8.2.1999 passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad, i.e., respondent no.
1. The judgments and orders dated 1.12.1993 and 8.2.1999 have been challenged in the present writ petition.
A reading of Section 60 of the Act, 1956 read with Section 10 of the Act, 1950 shows that on a notification under Section 8 having been published in the official gazette, all rights, title and interest included in the area under notification shall cease and be vested in the State free from all encumbrances and from the date of vesting, the Collector of the District be charged, for and on behalf of the State Government' with the general Superintendence, management, preservation and control of the land. For a ready reference, Section 10(a) of the Act, 1950 and Section 60 of the Act, 1956 are reproduced below:
"10. Consequences of vesting :- Where the notification under Section 8 has in respect of any agricultural area been published in the official Gazette, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any contract or document or in any other law for the time being in force, but save as otherwise provided in this Act, the consequences as hereinafter set forth shall, from the beginning of the date of vesting, ensue in respect of such area, namely, -
(a) all rights, title and interest of all the intermediaries in such area including rights, if any, in mines and minerals, and in sub-soil shall cease and be vested in the State free from all encumbrances;
60. Superintendence, management and control of land. -
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Collector shall as from the date of vesting be charged, for and on behalf of the State Government, with the general Superintendence, management, preservation and control of all lands and things which had vested in the State under Section 10.
(2) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1) a local authority, if directed by the State Government by notification in the office Gazette, may, as from the specified date, be charged for and on behalf of the State Government with the general management of all or any of the lands or things which have vested in the State under Section 10."
A reading of the aforesaid provisions shows that the Collector takes charge of the property as a representative of the State Government and, therefore, it is the State Government through Collector which has to be impleaded as a defendant in the case and the Collector is not required to be impleaded independently as a defendant in the case. In the judgment of the Board of Revenue reported in Triloki Nath (supra), it is not evident as to whether in that particular case before the Board of Revenue, the State of Uttar Pradesh through Collector was impleaded as a party or not. The judgment of the Board of Revenue was not helpful for the Additional Commissioner or the respondent no. 1 to decide the controversy before them. In the present case, the Government of Uttar Pradesh through the Collector had been impleaded as defendant no. 10 and the Nagar Palika through its Chief Executive Officer had also been impleaded as defendant no. 11. In view of the reasons given above, the necessary parties had been impleaded and, therefore, the opinion of the respondent no. 1 as well as the Additional Commissioner (Judicial) that the suit was bad for non-joinder of necessary party are contrary to law and are liable to be set-aside.
For the aforesaid reasons, the order dated 8.2.1999 passed by the Board of Revenue and the order dated 1.12.1993 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Meerut Division, District Meerut are, hereby, quashed and the matter is remanded back to the Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Meerut Division, District Meerut to decide Appeal No. 10/1993 on merits and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties. The Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Meerut Division, District Meerut shall decide the aforesaid appeal within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 30.1.2019 Satyam