Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36114 of 2018 Petitioner :- Kishan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Durga Prasad Tiwari,Vidya Kant Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mahesh Narain Singh
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. Shri Mahesh Narain Singh has accepted notice on behalf of Gaon Sabha.
The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 26.9.2018 passed by Addl. District Magistrate (Judicial), Gautam Budh Nagar in Case No.4177/2017 as Complaint Case No.D2017112704177 (Kishan Singh v. Land Management Committee, Uncha Amipur) under Section 122-B (4F) of UPZA & LR Act and the order dated 28.8.2017 passed by Asstt. Collector/ Tehsildar (Judicial) Dadri in Case No.T2711/2011 as Complaint Case No.D2017112704177 (Land Management Committee, Uncha Amipur v. Kishan Singh) under Section 122- B of UPZA & LR Act, 1950.
The record in question reflects that the proceeding in question has been initiated on the report of Lekhpal and Revenue Inspector in which it is submitted that the petitioner has encroached upon the land in question, which is recorded as 'Banjar' in revenue record. The petitioner was issued notices to which he has filed reply by stating that he is in possession over the land in dispute since the year 2000. The petitioner belongs to scheduled castes and agricultural labour and he has no other land except the disputed land and as such he is entitled for the benefit of 122-B (4-F) of UPZA & LR Act. After considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case vide order impugned the fourth respondent has opined that the petitioner is resident of Village Patadi and he has encroached upon the disputed land , which is situated in Village Uncha Amirpur. The Gram Sabha of both the villages are separate and as such the petitioner is not entitled for getting the benefit under Section 4-
F. The land in question is recorded as 'banjar' land, which has illegally been occupied by the petitioner. In this backdrop, the order impugned has been passed and the same has been affirmed by third respondent.
The Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and find that finding of fact has been recorded by the authorities concerned, which does not require any interference under Art.226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has not placed on record any material, which may warrant any interference by this Court.
In view of above, the writ petition sans merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 SP/