Allahabad High Court
Janak Singh And Others vs State Of U.P. And Others on 31 July, 2012
Bench: Amreshwar Pratap Sahi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?AFR
Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36827 of 2012
Petitioner :- Janak Singh And Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Sharad Kumar Pandey
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,D.D. Chauhan
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Heard learned counsel for petitioner Sri S.K. Pandey who has vehemently argued that the impugned orders are erroneous and are not in accordance with law. He contends that the proceedings under Section 122-B of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 had been earlier dropped, yet on an erroneous complaint the matter was again re-agitated. He submits that the petitioners as a matter of fact after having contested the matter had offered the Gaon Sabha alternative land, in lieu of the area which is said to be in the illegal occupation of the petitioner, for the purpose of excavating the pond.
The contention is that the Gaon Sabha as well as the Sub Divisional Magistrate of the area concerned both acceded to this request of the petitioner and accordingly the petitioner executed a registered gift deed in favour of the Gaon Sabha for an equivalent area of land which is alleged to be in the illegal occupation of the petitioner. Learned counsel contends that the impugned orders proceed on erroneous assumptions and cannot be countenanced as they discard the aforesaid developments.
The impugned orders record that the demi-official letter dated 9th April, 2010 was in relation to persons who were downtrodden and oppressed so that they may not be uprooted from their hutments, whereas the petitioners appear to be large tenure holders. In the circumstances, the petitioners were denied the benefit of the said demi-official letter which has been relied upon by the petitioners.
The learned Collector therefore has proceeded to reject the revisions filed against the order of the authority below recording that the petitioners are not entitled to any relief and the land deserves to be restored as a pond.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha as well as the learned Standing Counsel the issue relating to the offer of the petitioners and the consequential action taken of surrendering their own land in favour of the Gaon Sabha may be a fact which may require sifting of evidence and even otherwise the unauthorized occupation of the petitioners as well as the applicability of the demi-official letter may also require an answer from the Gaon Sabha concerned as well as the State for which the appropriate forum for the petitioners would be to file a suit for a declaration in respect of their rights as the proceedings under which the eviction has been ordered, namely Section 122-B, are summary proceedings.
In the circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioners the writ petition is consigned to records with liberty to the petitioners to file a suit without prejudice to their rights in any manner whatsoever.
Order Date :- 31.7.2012
Sahu
