Allahabad High Court
Chhote Lal vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 17 August, 2023
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166087
Court No. - 52
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 26129 of 2023
Petitioner :- Chhote Lal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shriprakash Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Mr. Shriprakash Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Harish Chandra Dubey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent nos.1 to 3 as well as Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent no.4.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for parties, the present petition is being finally decided at the admission stage without inviting counter affidavit since the entire controversy has been culminated into order dated 22.05.2023 which impugned the present petition, has been adjudicated in light of the judgment dated 19.12.2022 passed in Writ C No.38613 of 2022 (Chhote Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others).
3. The present petition has been filed seeking the following relief:-
"I- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 31.10.2022 (Annexure No.2 to the writ petition) passed by Assistant Collector Ist Class/Tehsildar, Tehsil- Shahganj, District- Jaunpur in case no.03712/2019 (Goan Sabha Vs. Chhote Lal and another) under section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and order dated 22.05.2023 passed by Respondent No.2 in Case No.RST/02913/2020 (Chhote Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others) under section 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006."
4. The specific stand has been taken up by the petitioner while assailing the earlier order which has been passed under Section 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 with regard to protection under Section 67-A of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, has not been discussed and as such, the matter was remitted back to the Appellate Authority for deciding afresh, whereupon after hearing the submission extended by the petitioner before the respondent no.2, the entire facts have been mentioned and has been admitted that the report as submitted by the concerned Lekhpal was without conducting any proper spot verification and the report submitted before the respondent no.3 was self-styled and without carrying any factual status of the portion of land which has been alleged to be encroached by the petitioner, in spite of that, the specific finding has not been recorded by the respondent no.2 with regard to protection as sought by the petitioner under Section 67-A of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
5. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel and learned counsel for Gram Sabha vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition and supported the findings mentioned in the order dated 22.05.2023 passed by the respondent no.2
6. By bare perusal of the judgment order dated 19.12.2022, it is crystal clear that categorical finding has been recorded by the Coordinate Bench that the construction whatsoever has been raised by the petitioner, was well before 1985 and as such, the protection under Section 67-A of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has to be dealt with while passing the order under Section 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 by the Appellate Authority. Even after remanding the matter back to the respondent no.2, the same error has been committed which is apparent from the face of record that no discussion with regard to protection as sought by the petitioner under Section 67-A of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, has been discussed.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the orders dated 22.05.2023 is hereby quashed and set aside, matter is again remanded back to the respondent no.2 for deciding afresh in light of the order dated 19.12.2022. The aforementioned exercise shall be completed within six months.
8. Accordingly, the instant petition is partly allowed.
Order Date :- 17.8.2023
Vivek Kr.
