JUDGMENT Hon’ble S.N. Srivastava, J.—This writ petition is directed against the order dated 10.9.1998, passed by the Tehsildar, Hasanpur/Assistant Collector, 1st Class, Hasanpur, District Jyotiba Phulenagar and other order dated 7.3.2001, passed by the Additional Collector (Finance & Revenue), Jyotiba Phulenagar dismissing the revision preferred against said order. 2. It transpires from the record that in Village Daudpur Bujurg, Tehsil Hasanpur, District Jyotiba Phulenagar Plot No. 3, area .08 hectare, Plot No. 7, .11, hectare, Plot No. 16, area .04 hectare and Plot No. 19, area .08 hectare, total area .31 Acre were recorded as Chakroad which were in possession of petitioner. In a proceeding under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, Tehsildar passed an order for eviction of petitioner (J.K. Dairy and Foods Limited) from aforesaid plots and also imposed damages of Rs. 7,44,000/- calculating at the rate of Rs.500/- per sq. yard. Order of Tehsildar was affirmed in revision. 3. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel as well as learned Counsel for Gaon Sabha. 4. The only ground urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the damages calculated against the petitioner is contrary to law and is liable to be quashed, but he did not dispute the order of eviction passed by the impugned order. Learned Counsel for the petitioner urged that under Rule 115-F(2) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Rules damages ought to have been calculated on the basis of the amount of rent computed at sanctioned hereditary rates. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also urged that the damages imposed by the impugned order was not calculated on the basis of sanctioned hereditary rate and as such the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 5. In reply to the same, Sri Bhola Nath Yadav, learned Standing Counsel, urged that though there is no definition of sanctioned hereditary rate under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act or the Rules framed thereunder, but any word which is not defined under the U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Act or the Rules framed thereunder, but is mentioned in the U.P. Tenancy Act, the same shall be taken note of for the purposes of sanctioned hereditary rates. He referred Sections 110, 111 and 112 of the U.P. Tenancy Act in this regard where the rates of hereditary tenancy are required to be determined in accordance with the procedure prescribed therein. He further urged that the damages should be calculated according to sanctioned hereditary rates on the principles laid down under Sections 110, 111 and 112 of the U.P. Tenancy Act. Lastly he urged that impugned orders were rightly passed in accordance with law. 6. Considered arguments of learned Counsel for the parties. 7. For the purposes of present case, Rule 115-F(2) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Rules is relevant, the same is being reproduced below for ready reference : “115-F (2) If the damage or loss caused through misappropriation is of such a nature as not capable of being repaired or made good, (as in the case of cutting of trees or grazing of plants or grass), the Collector shall assess the amount of damages or loss in terms of money at the prevailing market rate in the locality. In case of wrongful occupation of land, the damage caused to the Gaon Sabha or the local authority, as the case may be, shall be assessed for each year of such wrongful occupation or any part thereof, at 100 times the amount of rent computed at the sanctioned hereditary rates applicable to the plots concerned. In case the occupant of land continue to remain in such wrongful occupation, he shall be further liable to pay one-eight of the damages so assessed for every month of the continued occupation after the date of the order.” 8. The above provision makes it specifically clear that in case of wrongful occupation of land, the damage caused to the Gaon Sabha or the local authority, as the case may be, shall be assessed for each year of such wrongful occupation or any part thereof, at 100 times the amount of rent computed at the sanctioned hereditary rates applicable to the plots concerned. 9. Now the question further arises to be considered is that what would be the hereditary rate. 10. As sanctioned hereditary rate is not defined under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act or the Rules framed thereunder and it has been referred under Sections 110, 111 and 112 of the U.P. Tenancy Act. 11. 9. Now the question further arises to be considered is that what would be the hereditary rate. 10. As sanctioned hereditary rate is not defined under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act or the Rules framed thereunder and it has been referred under Sections 110, 111 and 112 of the U.P. Tenancy Act. 11. This Court is of the view that in view of Section 3 (26) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, the words and expression not defined in the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, but referred in the United Provinces Tenancy Act, 1939 may be considered for the purposes of sanctioned hereditary rate under Rule 115-F of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules. 12. Sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 110 of the U.P. Tenancy Act are relevant for the purposes of the present case, the same are being reproduced below : “110(1) The rates proposed by the Rent-rate Officer for hereditary tenants shall be such as will result in rents payable without hardship over a series of years by cultivating hereditary tenants with substantial holdings and shall be based on genuine and stable rents paid by such tenants. (2) In considering whether the genuine and stable rents paid by such tenants are payable without hardship over a series of years, the Rent-rate Officer shall have regard to, and compare- (a) the level of rents paid by tenants who held, or were admitted to land, at different times, and in particular the level of rents agreed to by tenants who were admitted to holdings or between the years 1309 Fasli and 1313 Fasli; (b) the prices of agricultural produce prevailing at such times; (c) changes in the crops grown and in the amount of the produce; (d) the value of the produce with a view to seeing that the valuation of the holdings of hereditary tenants at the proposed rates does not exceed one-fifth of such value; (e) the expenses of cultivation, and the cost to the cultivator of maintaining himself and his family.” 13. Section 110 (2) of the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939 makes it clear that while considering the genuine and stable rents paid by the tenant, the Rent-rate Officer shall have regard to the criteria laid down under Section 110 (2) of the U.P. Tenancy Act. Section 110 (2) of the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939 makes it clear that while considering the genuine and stable rents paid by the tenant, the Rent-rate Officer shall have regard to the criteria laid down under Section 110 (2) of the U.P. Tenancy Act. The rest of the provisions of Sections 110, 111 and 112 of the U.P. Tenancy Act are not relevant in view of the fact that there is no Rent-rate Officer or procedure to submit the report to the Board is applicable. 14. It further appears that under the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939, 1309-Fasli and 1313-Fasli was considered as relevant records for the purposes of calculating rent. The relevant factors to be taken into consideration for determining hereditary rate, criteria under Section 110(2) of the U.P. Tenancy Act may be relevant factors with the modification that instead of 1309-Fasli 313 Fasli, 1356 Fasli-1359 Fasli and 1362-Fasli may be considered as relevant year which may be taken into consideration under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act. Neither the Tehsildar nor the Revisional authority have taken note of all these factors while determining the damages imposed under the impugned order. The impugned orders to the extent of calculation of damages and imposition of the same suffer from error of law and are liable to be quashed. It is stated by Sri B.N. Yadav, learned Standing Counsel, that there may be some Government Order. If so, the same may also be taken into consideration while calculating damages. 15. With the result, writ petition succeeds and is allowed in part. Impugned orders dated 10.9.1998, passed by the Tehsildar and 7.3.2001, passed by the Revisional authority relating to damages are quashed. Tehsildar, Tehsil Hasanpur, District Jyotiba Phulenagar is directed to pass appropriate orders in the light of the observations made hereinabove after making calculation in accordance with the principles discussed in the body of the judgment within three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. In case any amount has already been deposited in pursuance of the impugned order, the same shall be adjusted while determining damages. No order as to cost. ————