Research › Browse › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

1992 DIGILAW 340 (ALL)

State v. Nanhey

1992-03-16

BHAIRO PRASAD

body1992
JUDGMENT Bhairo Prasad, Member. - This is a reference under Section 333-A of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1961. 2. In the court of Tahsildar/Assistant Collector, Nagina District Bijnor proceeding under Section 123-B of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 started that the opposite party Nanhey has encroached upon 12 yards area of Plot No. 30 of Village Rampur Chhajmal, Pargana and Tahsil Nagina, District Bijnor. The trial court on 30.8.1978 ordered the ejectment of the opposite party from that land and imposed a damage of Rs. 108/-. An application was filed by the opposite party on 15.1.1979. The trial court set aside the order dated 30.8.1978 on 6.2.1979 and after hearing again he dropped the proceeding on 16.2.1979. In this order he observed that opposite party should remove the encroachment within a month. He failed to remove the encroachment, again fresh proceeding under Section 122-B was stated. Against this order the State Government filed this revision before the Additional Commissioner who has recommended this revision that the trial court has no jurisdiction to review its own order. The order is without jurisdiction. He also recommended that the Tahsildar in the subsequent orders have found the opposite party in possession and have ordered for removal of the encroachment, therefore, the proceeding could not have been dropped. The order is passed in the irregular exercise of jurisdiction and with material illegality. No objection has been filed against this recommendation. The order of the trial court was passed without jurisdiction and with material illegality in the exercise of jurisdiction. 3. I carefully considering the recommendation is of the opinion that the learned Assistant Collector has reviewed his order dated 30.8.1978 without jurisdiction. He dropped the proceeding after recording a finding of illegal possession over the Gaon Sabha land, therefore, he acted illegally with material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction. I, therefore, accepted this reference and set aside the orders of the Assistant Collector dated 6.2.1979 and 16.2.1979.