Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 48470 of 2012 Petitioner :- Phool Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- K. Ajit,Arvind Srivastava Iii Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mahesh Narain Singh
Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
Upon a notice being served upon the petitioner under Rule 115(d) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1952 read with section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 on 10.2.2010, the petitioner replied to the same on 25.2.2011. Thereafter, an order was passed under section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 by the Assistant Collector, First Class on 13.12.2011 holding that the petitioner was in illegal possession over plot no.79 area 120 sq. meters which was a Gram Sabha land. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner filed a revision which when was dismissed vide order dated 29.8.2012, the instant writ petition was filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that when the notice was served upon the petitioner stating that the petitioner had occupied certain Gram Sabha land over plot no.79, then a definite reply was submitted that the petitioner's possession was not over plot no.79 but was over plot no.77. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no survey or demarcation proceeding was undertaken and only on the basis of a report of the Halka Lekhpal, it was concluded that the petitioner had possession over plot no.79 and orders, thereafter, were passed illegally for the removal of the petitioner's possession. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon a judgment of this Court dated 28.2.2017 passed in Writ-C No.39448 of 2016 (Ram Bihari Dwivedi vs. State of U.P. & Ors.).
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State, however, submitted that since there was a report of the Halka Lekhpal, it could not be denied that the petitioner's possession was over plot no.79.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel, this Court is of the view that when there was a specific averment from the side of the petitioner that the petitioner's possession was not over plot no.79 but was over plot no.77, then a definite demarcation proceeding ought to have been undergone. In the absence of any demarcation proceeding, the orders dated 13.12.2011 and 29.8.2012 cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and, therefore, deserve to be set aside.
Under such circumstances, the order dated 13.12.2011 passed by the Assistant Collector, First Class/Tehsildar, Sadar, District Rampur and the order dated 29.8.2012 passed by the Collector, Rampur are quashed and are set- aside.
The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 24.8.2021 GS (Siddhartha Varma, J.)