Allahabad High Court
Dharmraj vs State Of U.P. And 7 Others on 7 July, 2022
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 32
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1337 of 2022
Petitioner :- Dharmraj
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Some Narayan Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Achal Singh
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Gram Sabha and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1,2 and 3.
The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief:-
"I. Issue a writ, order or Direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 to incorporate the judicial order dated 19.07.2005 passed by Assistant Consolidation Officer, Mau, Chitrakoot in Case No. 1106 passed under Section 12 of U.P. C.H. Act, 1953 passed to the Gatas nos. 307 (0.36 Acre), 308 (0.93 Acre), 312M (0.70 Acre, 313 (0.35 Acre), and 320/2 (0.29 acre) total 8 gatas and total area 3.98 acres of Chak Number 109 of Dhanraj Singh, in pursuance of the subsequent notification issued by State Government being Notification no. 4426 / ji-dhara-3(1)/2012-13(IV) dated 31.10.2014, to its records then direct to the concerned officer to rectify the revenue records to its current changed gatas nos. with equal area as per mandates of the consolidation proceedings.
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the representation dated 27.12.2021 (Annexure No. 6 to the Writ Petition)."
The instant petition has been filed for implementation of order dated 19.07.2005 in pursuance of the provisions as enunciated under Section 6(2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (U.P. C.H. Act). The facts giving arise to the present petition is that the land in dispute was initially belongs to one Dhanraj Singh S/o Shivpal Singh, who has executed a registered sale-deed dated 04.06.2005 to the extent of his 1/4th share in favour of the present petitioner. On the basis of the aforesaid sale-deed the present petitioner has moved an application under Section 12 of U.P. C.H. Act for mutating his name in revenue record in place of recorded bhumidhar. The aforesaid application under Section 12 of U.P. C.H. Act was registered as Case No. 1106 and finally decided by the order dated 19.07.2005. In paragraph nos. 5 and 6 of the writ petition details of the case has been given and it is categorically stated that the order dated 19.07.2005 passed by Assistant Consolidation Officer become final between the parties, which has not been challenged before the Court competent.
It is apposite that the village in question namely, Bakta Bujurg, Tehsil Karwi, District Chitrakoot was notified under Section 4(2) of U.P. C.H. Act promulgated on 27.09.1979. At subsequent stage, the aforesaid notification for consolidation operation under Section 4 of U.P. C.H. Act was cancelled by a fresh notification under Section 6(1) of U.P. C.H. Act promulgated on 31.10.2014 (annexure no. 3).
It is submitted that the aforesaid order dated 19.07.2005 passed by Assistant Consolidation Officer was passed during consolidation operation before its cancellation, wherein village / unit cease to be under consolidation operation by virtue of notification dated 31.10.2014 under Section 6(1) of U.P. C.H. Act. Despite repeated requests made by the petitioner, till date authorities concerned are not complying with the order dated 19.07.2005, which has attained finality between the parties. To the best knowledge of the petitioner the aforesaid order has not been challenged before any competent Court. It is further submitted that the last representation dated 27.12.2021 (Annexure No. 6) moved on behalf of the petitioner is still pending disposal before the District Magistrate / District Deputy Director of Consolidation (Respondent No. 2).
Learned counsel for the petitioner has laid emphasis on the provision of Section 6(2) of U.P. C.H. Act and submits that the Consolidation Authorities are under legal obligation to implement the order dated 19.07.2005 under the provision as enunciated under Section 6(2) of U.P. C.H. Act. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment passed by this Court in Writ B No. 695 of 2021 (Shankar Lal Vs. State of U.P. and Others).
In the matter of Shankar Lal (Supra), after considering several judgments and government notification dated 12.12.2014, this Court has already held that the effect of cancellation of the notification under section 4 of the U.P.C.H. Act is that, subject to the final orders passed regarding correction of the record, the area ceases to be under consolidation operations. Relevant paragraphs i.e. para no.6, 7, 8 and 14 of the aforesaid judgment are being reproduced below :-
"6. Section 6(1) of U.P.C.H. Act empowers the State Government to cancel the notification issued under Section 4 of U.P.C.H. Act by which particular area or unit brought under the consolidation operation. The consequential effect of the cancellation of notification is enunciated under sub-Section 2 of Section 6 of U.P.C.H. Act which denotes that, from the date of cancellation of the notification area/unit shall ceased to be under consolidation operation subject to final orders passed with regard to correction of records.
7. To avert any complications due to the cancellation of the notification promulgated under Section 4 of U.P.C.H. Act, Legislation has made the provisio under Section 6(2) of U.P.C.H. Act. Phrase "subject to the final orders relating to the correction of land records" as used u/s 6(2) of U.P.C.H. Act explicitly connotes wider effect of notification u/s 6(1) of U.P.C.H. Act. After cancellation of notification, land records, including basic year entries should be corrected in accordance with the orders, passed during the consolidation proceedings, which have attained the finality.
8. Provisions u/s 6(2) of U.P.C.H. Act, left no room for doubt that final orders, if any, passed during the consolidation proceeding, on or before the cancellation of notification as provided u/s 6(1) of U.P.C.H. Act, shall be given effect to the revenue records and, accordingly, final revenue records shall be maintained after cessation of the area to be under consolidation operations.
14. In this view of matter, Consolidation authorities are under legal obligation to correct the revenue record after the cancellation of the notification under Section 4 of U.P.C.H. Act in accordance with the final orders which were passed and attained finality on or before the cancellation of notification as mentioned under Section 6(1) of U.P.C.H. Act. Present matter relates to the consequential effect of the cancellation of the notification wherein final order had already been passed to correct the revenue record. Therefore, petitioner has legal right to get his name recorded under the provisions of Section 6(2) of U.P.C.H. Act."
It is further submitted that in a similar matter, this Court has passed order dated 29.09.2021 in Writ B No.1895 of 2020 (Ram Deo and another vs. State of U.P. & Ors).
In this conspectus as above, claim of the petitioners to get their names recorded in the Revenue Record in pursuance of the final order as mentioned in paragraph nos.5 and 6 of the writ petition, after notification under section 6 (1) of the U.P.C.H. Act, is justified in the eyes of law and the authorities concerned are under legal obligation to implement the said order passed by the competent Court, which became final between the parties.
As such, present writ petition is allowed with a direction to the District Magistrate/District Deputy Director of Consolidation, Banda (respondent no.2) to consider and decide the representation moved on behalf of the petitioner for the implementation of the order dated 19.07.2005, as mentioned in paragraph nos.5 and 6 of this writ petition, in the light of the provisions as enunciated under section 6 (2) of the U.P.C.H. Act, in accordance with law, if there is no other impediment, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order along with fresh representation, which shall be moved by the petitioners within a period of three weeks from today. .
The writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 7.7.2022
SK Srivastava
