Allahabad High Court
Kali Shankar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ... on 6 August, 2022
Bench: Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, Rajnish Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 2
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5059 of 2022
Petitioner :- Kali Shankar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue , Civil Secrt. U.P. Lko. And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Prashant Shukla,Priya Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh
Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J.
Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel and Mr. Mohan Singh, learned counsel representing Gaon Sabha/Land Management Committee concerned.
By instituting these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India a prayer has been made that a direction be issued to the Sub Divisional Officer Tehsil & District Amethi to consider and allow/permit the petitioner to cut 2000 eucalyptus trees planted and nourished by him over the land bearing Gata No.1745M, situate at Village Thaura, Post Pindauria, Tehsil & District Amethi.
It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner Khasra Plot No.1745M is recorded in the revenue record as talab in respect of which the petitioner was granted ten years fishing lease with effect from 1.12.2006 till 30.11.2016. It has further been argued that on the spot though earlier there was some pond, however, subsequently nature of said land changed. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in the year 2006 itself the petitioner had planted 2000 eucalyptus trees and now he is not being allowed to cut and use the same.
The lease deed executed in favour of the petitioner is on record, according to which the petitioner was granted lease in relation to fishing rights alone with effect from 1.12.2006 till 30.11.2016. One of the conditions of lease is that lease holder will have no right to do agriculture on the land in question. As a matter of fact the only purpose for which the lease was granted to the petitioner was to permit him fishing in the pond and not for any other purpose. The Gram Sabha land granted on lease to the petitioner could not have been utilized by him for any purpose other than fishing, including plantation of any kind of trees.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this juncture has cited certain judgments in the cases of Lata Singh Vs. Patiraj Singh; 1983 ALL. L. J. 473, Ram Roop and 24 ors. Vs. D.D.C. and 3 ors.; Writ-B No.41383 of 2014; Chinta Ram and another Vs. State of U.P. and others; Writ-C No.28839 of 2019 and Ram Lakhan Vs. D.D.C. Sultanpur and others; Writ Petition No.1741 (Consolidation) of 1981 and has stated that though the person who plants trees on the gaon sabha land does not have any right or title in the land, however, so far as the trees planted by him are concerned, such person will have full and complete rights on the planted trees.
The aforesaid judgments cited by learned counsel for the petitioner do not come to his rescue for the reason that the petitioner has not planted trees on the gaon sabha land which was lying vacant. The petitioner, in contravention of the conditions of lease granted to him for fishing rights, had instead of fishing in the pond, planted eucalyptus trees, which in our considered opinion, not only contravenes the conditions of the lease, but has also resulted in commercial exploitation of valuable property of the gaon sabha.
Our attention has been drawn to a document annexed at Page No.42 to the writ petition which is dated 16.07.2022 and is an auction notice whereby notice has been given to the public for auctioning the trees standing in Khasra Plot No.468-Kha on 22.07.2022.
We have also been informed that Gata No.468-Kha and Gata No.1746M, over which the petitioner was granted fishing lease are adjacent to each other. The auction notice is only in respect of the trees standing on Khasra Plot No.468-Kha and not those standing on Khasra Plot No.1745M.
For the reasons aforesaid, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition as the petitioner does not have any right in the trees said to have been planted by him for the reason that plantation of trees is in contravention of the conditions of lease which was granted to him for fishing rights.
The writ petition is thus dismissed.
It is however directed that Sub Divisional Officer concerned shall take all the 2000 eucalyptus trees said to be standing at Khasra No.1745M in his custody and as and when required, dispose them of, precedes of which shall be deposited in the appropriate fund belonging to the Gram Panchayat concerned.
The District Magistrate, Amethi is directed to supervise personally that the trees standing on Khasra Plot No.1745M are taken in the custody of Sub Divisional Officer concerned.
Learned Standing Counsel shall communicate this order to the District Magistrate and the Sub Divisional Officer concerned forthwith.
.
(Rajnish Kumar, J.) (Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, J.)
Order Date :- 6.8.2022
Renu/-
