The petitioner has moved this Court seeking invocation of jurisdiction under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 19501 in respect of certain illegal encroachments on a land which is recorded for public utility purposes in the revenue records of Village Ismilepur Dubkhar, Pargana and Tehsil Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar.
The records would indicate that the petitioner has moved a representation to the Collector, Ambedkar Nagar merely only on 18 September 2014, i.e. one day before the date of filing of these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution on 19 September 2014.
Sub-section (1) of Section 122-B of the Act provides that where any property vested under the provisions of the Act in a Gaon Sabha or a local authority is damaged or misappropriated or where any Gaon Sabha or local authority is entitled to take or retain possession of any land under the provisions of the Act and such land is occupied otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of the Act, the Land Management Committee or the local authority, as the case may be, shall inform the Assistant Collector concerned in the manner prescribed. Under sub-section (2) of Section 122-B of the Act, the jurisdiction of the Assistant Collector is invoked on the information received under sub-section (1) or otherwise.
Sub-section (2) of Section 122-B provides as follows:
"Where from the information received under sub-section (1) or otherwise, the Assistant Collector is satisfied that any property referred to in sub-section (1) has been damaged or misappropriated or any person is in occupation of any land, referred to in that sub-section, in contravention of the provisions of this Act, he shall issue notice to the person concerned to show cause why compensation for damage, misappropriation or wrongful occupation as mentioned in such notice be not recovered from him or, as the case may be, why he should not be evicted from such land."
Similarly, Rule 115-D (1) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Rules, 19522 makes the following provisions:
"Where the Land Management Committee or the local authority, as the case may be, fails to take action in accordance with Section 122-B, the Collector shall--
(a) on an application of the Chairman ; Member of Secretary of the Committee ; or
(b) on a report made by the Lekhpal under sub-rule (3) of Rule 115-C; or
(c) on the report of the local authority concerned or its official referred to in the proviso to sub-rule (5) of Rule 115-C;
(d) on facts otherwise coming to his notice;
call upon the person concerned through notice in Z.A. Form 49-A to refrain from causing damage or misappropriation, to repair the damage or make good the loss or remove wrongful occupation and to pay damages or to do or refrain from doing any other thing as the exigencies of the situation may demand or to show cause against it in such time not exceeding fifteen days as may be specified in the notice."
From these provisions, it is clear that, initially, what sub-section (1) of Section 122-B contemplates is that the Land Management Committee or the local authority shall inform the Assistant Collector in the manner prescribed where any property, which is vested in a Gaon Sabha or a local authority, has been damaged or misappropriated or where it is entitled to take or retain possession of a land which is occupied otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of the Act. However, sub-section (2) of Section 122-B makes it abundantly clear that the Assistant Collector can be satisfied in regard to the damage or misappropriation as contemplated in sub-section (1) or in regard to unlawful occupation of a land either on the basis of the information which is received under sub-section (1) or otherwise.
The expression 'or otherwise' is wide enough to include information which is received from any person in regard to an unlawful occupation or possession of a land which is vested in a Gaon Sabha or a local authority.
Rule 115-D makes the position equally clear because if the Land Management Committee or the local authority fails to take action in accordance with Section 122-B, the Collector is thereafter empowered to act. Under clause (d) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 115-D, the Collector can act on facts otherwise coming to his notice.
Thus, a comprehensive procedure is laid down in Section 122-B of the Act as well as in Rule 115-D (1) of the Rules for invoking the jurisdiction of the Assistant Collector or, as the case may be, the Collector.
The expression 'Collector' for the purposes of Rule 115-D would include the Assistant Collector of the First Class as defined in Section 3 (4) of the Act.
This Court has been moved under Article 226 of the Constitution without a due invocation of the remedy under Section 122-B. Where the Statute itself as well as the Rules provide a comprehensive remedy, there is no reason or justification to move the Court under Article 226 without exhausting the remedy available in law. It is only where the Court is satisfied that there is an inaction on the part of the competent statutory authority designated to exercise powers under Section 122-B and Rule 115-D, that the Court may assume jurisdiction in an appropriate case and issue directions. Otherwise, the filing of a writ petition before this Court under Article 226 should not be taken as a substitute for invocation of the normal remedies which are provided under the Act and the Rules.
In view of this discussion, we leave it open to the petitioner to pursue the remedy available under Section 122-B or, as the case may be, under Rule 115-D.
At this stage, the interference of the Court would not be warranted. Hence, we are not inclined to entertain the petition at the present stage.
The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.