HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?AFR Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 69651 of 2011 Petitioner :- Abhushan Brahma Shah And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Anil Kumar Mishra Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Heard Sri Anil Kumar Mishra learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjay Goswami for the respondent State. This matter had been adjourned on 2.12.2011 to enable the learned Standing Counsel to obtain instructions.
Sri Goswami states that instructions have been obtained and as a matter of fact the matter has to be decided after collecting information in relation to the deductions which have been reflected in the appellate order dated 31.8.2007.
From the records, it appears that against the declaration of surplus land under the 1960 Act an appeal was filed by the petitioners that was allowed on 31.8.2007 on the ground that the petitioners are claiming benefit of reduction in area during consolidation operations and record operations. After the said order was passed the prescribed authority himself issued instructions on 7th August, 2010 constituting a three member team to collect the said information after verifying it from Prapatra 3 (Ga) in order to proceed in the matter.
No information appears to have been tendered by the team so constituted and as a matter of fact no such information was further tendered by any of the authorities. The prescribed authority without collecting the said information proceeded to reject the objections whereafter an appeal was filed and the same has also been dismissed on the same grounds.
Sri Goswami for the State submits that at this stage it is not necessary to file any counter affidavit and the matter can be disposed of finally with appropriate directions to the authority.
Having heard Sri Mishra and Sri Goswami, it appears that the claim of deduction in area has been made on account of alleged reductions in the area of the declared surplus land on account of Consolidation operations or Records operations. It is not difficult to collect this material, inasmuch as, whatever reduction has been made has to be looked into keeping in view the deductions so permissible. The same is admissible as held in various judgments of this court which benefit has to be therefore extended to the tenure holder. These deductions therefore have to be based on certain facts about which the petitioners are also obliged to stake their claim. Accordingly, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending before this court as admittedly neither any evidence has been collected nor adduced by any of the parties and the matter has been disposed of without any information on that score.
Accordingly, the impugned orders cannot be sustained. The order of the Prescribed Authority dated 12.11.2010 and the Appellate order dated 3.11.2011 are hereby quashed. The matter stands remitted to the Prescribed Authority. The Prescribed Authority shall collect the information as per its letter dated 7th August, 2010 and the petitioners shall also tender their details relating to deductions as claimed by them so that matter can be finalized after receiving the information and entertaining objections thereon.
Accordingly the writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid directions.
Order Date :- 12.12.2011 Sahu