JUDGMENT S.N. Srivastava, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel.
2. By the impugned judgments suit for declaration filed by plaintiffs under Section 229-B of the U.P.Z.A & L.R. Act with regard to Plot No. 422/17 was decreed by all the courts below.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners urged that the judgments of the courts below were passed against the law and are unsustainable in law. He further urged that the findings of the courts below on the question of fraud and obtaining sale deed by setting up and imposter as well as the death of Chet Ram in the year 1984 are perverse and cannot be sustained in law. He further urged that according to plaint allegation that while obtaining sale deed fraud was committed as such the documents is voidable and only the Civil court can cancel the sale deed. Revenue court is incompetent to declare Plaintiffs as Bhumidhars ignoring the sale deed. He prayed for quashing of three impugned orders passed by the authorities below.
4. Considered the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.
5. The concurrent findings recorded by the courts below are that Chet Ram had already died in the year 1984 and the sale deed was got registered by the petitioners-Defendants at New Delhi through and imposter. It was further found by the courts below that the Petitioner-Defendants had admitted in their argument that Plaintiffs Ratia and Chetram were members of Scheduled Caste category and Petitioner-Defendants had full knowledge about this fact, but this fact had been deliberately concealed by the Transferees from the registering authority. These findings were arrived at on careful consideration of the evidence on record by the authorities below and are findings of fact. No interference is called for in these findings.
6. From perusal of materials on record it is also clear that Plaintiffs respondents are members of the Scheduled Caste category. There are certain restrictions on transfer of land by members of Scheduled Caste community under Sections 157-A and 157-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, the same are being quoted below:-
"157-A Restrictions on transfer of land by members of Scheduled Caste.- (1) Without prejudice to the restrictions contained in Sections 153 to 157, no bhumidhar or asami belonging to a Scheduled Caste shall have the right to transfer any land by way of sale, gift, mortgage or lease to a person not belonging to a Scheduled Caste, except with the previous approval of the Collector:
Provided that no such approval shall be given by the Collector in case where the land held in Uttar Pradesh by the transferor on the date of application under this section is less that 1.26 hectares or where the area of land so held in Uttar Pradesh by the transferor on the said date is after such transfer, likely to be reduced to less than 1.26 hectares.
(2) The Collector shall, on an application made in that behalf in the prescribed manner, make such inquiry as may be prescribed.
157-B Restrictions on transfer of land by members of Scheduled Tribes.- (1) Without prejudice to the restrictions contained in Sections 153 to 157, no bhumidhar or asami belonging to a Scheduled Tribe shall have the right to transfar by way of sale, gift, mortage or lease or otherwise any land to a person not belonging to the Scheduled Tribes."
7. This is not disputed that the petitioners do not belong to Scheduled Caste category and as such the transfer made in contravention to this Act shall be void under Section 166 of the U.P. Zamindar Abolition & Land Reforms Act. Section 166 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act is being quoted below:-
"166. Every transfer made in contravention of the provisions of this Act shall be void."
8. In the case in hand as Rati Ram and Chet Ram never executed any sale deed, sale deed relied upon by the petitioners was out come of fraud through an imposter, such transfer cannot confer any right to the petitioners.
9. Even if Rati Ram and Chet Ram, who belong to Scheduled Caste category, would have actually executed any sale deed, the sale deed so executed without approval of the Collector as required under Section 157-A of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act would have been void and could not confer any right to the transferees.
10. In view of the discussions made above, the Revenue authorities in the Suit under Section 229-B of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act rightly declared Plaintiffs as co-bhumidhars and declared the sale deed relied upon by the petitioners as a void document un-enforceable in law.
11. The writ petitioner is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.
12. It was further urged that land in dispute was acquired and petitioners got compensation taking advantage of mutation of their names on the basis of sale deed and, therefore, no relief could be granted to the plaintiffs.
13. This Court is of the opinion that if it is so plaintiffs are entitled to recover the compensation alongwith interest payable presently by the nationalized Banks from the date of receipt of the compensation from the petitioners. For this purpose, plaintiffs may move application to the Collector, Meerut, who shall pass appropriate orders on the application moved by the plaintiffs and recover the amount of compensation alongwith interest, as indicated above, as arrears of land revenue at an early date.
14. With above observations writ petition is dismissed. No order as to cost.