JUDGMENT : Hon’ble Alok Singh, J (Oral) Present petition is filed assailing the judgment and order dated 08.10.2007 passed by Assistant Collector, 1st Class, Laksar/Tehsildar, Laksar whereby petitioner was directed to be evicted from the Gram Sabha land of Khasra No. 15 measuring 0.010 hectare, village Bhagtanpur, Majra Niranjanpur, Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar and petitioner was further directed to pay Rs. 500/- as damages for illegal occupation of the Gram Sabha land and Rs. 37/- as expenses as well as orders dated 11.11.2010, 23.06.2014 and 26.03.2015 passed by Revisional Court/Collector, Haridwar. 2. Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that land of Khasra No. 15 total measuring 0.236 hectare of village Bhagtanpur, Majra Niranjanpur, Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar was/is recorded as Johad (village pond); petitioner was found in unauthorized possession of land measuring 0.010 hectare of Khasra No. 15 whereupon notice was issued to the petitioner on Form 49 Ka and after hearing the petitioner as well as counsel for Gram Sabha and after examining the entire material available on record, learned Assistant Collector, 1st Class/Tehsildar, Laksar vide impugned judgment and order dated 08.10.2007, was pleased to hold that since land, in question, is a part of Khasra No. 15, which is recorded as land of Johad (village pond), therefore, possession of the petitioner cannot be regularized thereupon and petitioner is liable to be evicted therefrom and was further pleased to pass eviction order against the petitioner; feeling aggrieved, petitioner has filed revision before the Collector, Haridwar, however, revision was dismissed and recall application moved by the petitioner was also dismissed. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court by invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. I have heard Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent no. 1 and have carefully perused the record. 4. Ordinarily, if revision is not heard, on merit by the Revisional Court, this Court would have remanded the matter to the Revisional Court to decide it afresh on merit, in accordance with law. However, if facts are admitted and rights of the parties can be adjudicated by this Court, so in order to avoid unnecessary pendency of the case, remand order is not always warranted and this Court, on the basis of material available on record, can decide the lis on merit, in accordance with law. 5. However, if facts are admitted and rights of the parties can be adjudicated by this Court, so in order to avoid unnecessary pendency of the case, remand order is not always warranted and this Court, on the basis of material available on record, can decide the lis on merit, in accordance with law. 5. Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner, does not dispute that property, in question, is part of Khasra No. 15 of village Bhagtanpur, Majra Niranjanpur, Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar and entire area of Khasra No. 15 measuring 0.236 hectare was / is recorded as Johad (public pond) of the village. 6. Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that petitioner is in possession of land measuring 0.010 hectare only of Khasra No. 15. He contends that since petitioner is a Scheduled Caste, therefore, benefit of Section 122-B (4-F) should be extended in favour of the petitioner and his construction standing on the spot should be regularized. 7. Since facts are admitted and only benefit of Section 122-B (4-F) of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act is claimed, therefore, I proceed to decide the question of law raised by Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner, instead of remanding the matter to decide it afresh by the Revisional Court. 8. Section 122-B of the U.P. Z.A. & L. R. Act reads as under: “122-B Powers of the Land Management Committee and the Collector- (1) Whereby any property vested under the provisions of this Act, in a Gaon Sabha or a local authority is damaged or misappropriated or where any Gaon Sabha or local authority is entitled to take or retain possession of any land under the provisions of this Act and such land is occupied otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act, the Land Management Committee or Local Authority, as the case may be, shall inform the Assistant Collector concerned in the manner prescribed. (2) Where from the information received under sub-section (1) or otherwise, the Assistant Collector is satisfied that any property referred to in sub-section (1) has been damaged or misappropriated or any person is in occupation of any land, referred to in that sub-section, in contravention of the provisions of this Act, he shall issue notice to the person concerned to show cause why compensation for damage, misappropriation or wrongful occupation as mentioned in such notice be not recovered from him or, as the case may be, why he should not be evicted from such land. (3) If the person to whom a notice has been issued under sub-section (2) fails to show cause within the time specified in the notice or within such extended time not exceeding (thirty days) from the date of service of such notice on such person, as the Assistant Collector may allow in this behalf, or if the cause shown is found to be insufficient, the Assistant Collector may direct that such person may be evicted from the land and may, for that purpose, use, or cause to be used such force as may be necessary and may direct that the amount of compensation for damage, misappropriation or wrongful occupation be recovered from such person as arrears of land revenue. (4) If the Assistant Collector is of opinion that the person showing cause is not guilty of causing the damage or misappropriation or wrongful occupation referred to in the notice under sub-section (2), he shall discharge the notice. (4-A) Any person aggrieved by the order of the Assistant Collector under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) may, within thirty days from the date of such order, prefer a revision before the Collector on the grounds mentioned in clauses (a) to (c) of Section 333. (4-B) The procedure to be followed in any action taken under this section shall be such as may be prescribed. (4-C) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 333 or section 333-A, but subject to the provisions of this section- (i) every order of the Assistant Collector under this section shall, subject to the provisions of sub-sections (4-A) and (4-D), be final; (ii) every order of the Collector under this 5 section shall, subject to the provisions of subsection (4-D), be final. (4-C) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 333 or section 333-A, but subject to the provisions of this section- (i) every order of the Assistant Collector under this section shall, subject to the provisions of sub-sections (4-A) and (4-D), be final; (ii) every order of the Collector under this 5 section shall, subject to the provisions of subsection (4-D), be final. (4-D) Any person aggrieved by the order of the Assistant Collector or Collector in respect of any property under this section, may file a suit in a court of competent jurisdiction to establish the right claimed by him in such property. (4-E) No such suit as is referred to in sub-section (4-D) shall lie against an order of the Assistant Collector, if a revision is preferred to the Collector under sub-section (4-A). Explanation- For the purposes of this section, the expression ‘Collector’ means the officer appointed as Collector under the provisions of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 and includes an Additional Collector.] {(4-F) Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing sub-section, where any agricultural labourer belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe is in occupation of any land vested in a Gaon Sabha under section 117 (not being land mentioned in section 132) having occupied it from before [May1, 2002], and the land so occupied together with land, if any, held by him from before the said date as bhumidhar, sirdar or asami, does not exceed 1.26 hectares (3.125 acres), then no action under this section shall be taken by the Land Management Committee or the Collector against such labourer, and [he shall be admitted as bhumidhar with non-transferable rights of that land under section 195 and it shall not be necessary for him to institute a suit for declaration of his rights as bhumidhar with non-transferable rights in that land.]} Explanation- The expression ‘agricultural labourer’ shall have the meaning assigned to it in section 198. (5) Rules 115-C to 115-H of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1952, shall be and be always deemed to have been made under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, as amended by the Uttar Pradesh Land Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 1961, as if this section has been in force on all material dates and shall accordingly continue in force until altered or repealed or amended in accordance with provisions of this Act.]” 9. A bare perusal of sub-section 4-F of Section 122-B of the Act would demonstrate that if any agricultural labourer belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe is in occupation of any land vested in a Gaon Sabha under Section 117 (not being land mentioned in Section 132) and his possession is prior to May 13, 2007 and entire land in possession of that occupier does not exceed 1.26 hectare, then he shall not be evicted under Section 122-B of the Act. 10. Section 132 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act reads as under: “132. Land in which (Bhumidhari) rights shall not accrue. - Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 131, but without prejudice to the provisions of Section 19 (Bhumidhari) rights shall not accrue in: (a) pasture lands or lands covered by water and used for the purpose of growing singhara or other produce or land in the bed of a river and used for casual or occasional cultivation; 7 (b) such tracts of shifting or unstable cultivation as the State Government may specify by notification in the Gazette; and (c) lands declared by the State Government by notification in the Official Gazette, to be intended or set apart for taungya plantation or grove lands of a (Gaon Sabha) or a Local Authority or land acquired or held for public purpose and in particular and without prejudice to the generality of this clause - i. lands set apart for military encamping grounds; ii. lands included within railways or canal boundaries; iii. lands situate within the limits of any cantonment; iv. lands included in sullage farms or trenching grounds belonging as such to a local authority; v. lands acquired by a town improvement trust in accordance with a scheme sanctioned under Section 42 of the U.P. Town Improvement Act, 1919 (U.P. Act VII of 1919) or by a municipality for a purpose mentioned in Clause (a) or Clause (c) of the Section 8 of the Municipalities Act, 1916 (U.P. Act VII of 1916); and (vi) lands set apart for public purposes under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (U. P. Act V of 1954).” 11. A bare perusal of Section 132 of the Act would demonstrate that no rights shall accrue in pasture or land covered by the water bodies and used for the purpose of growing singhara and other produce or land in the bed of a river and used for casual or occasional cultivation. 12. This is settled position of law that land covered under Section 132 of the Act cannot be allotted for any purpose and no right can be accrued under sub-section 4-F of Section 122-B of the Act over the land mentioned in Section 132 of the Act, therefore, argument so advanced by Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner, cannot be accepted and are hereby rejected. 13. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Jagpal Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and other reported in 2011 (11) SCC 396 in paragraphs 18, 19, 20 and 23 has held as under: “18. The present is a case of land recorded as a village pond. This Court in Hinch Lal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi (followed by the Madras High Court in L. Krishnan v. State of Tamil Nadu) held that land recorded as a pond must not be allowed to be allotted to anybody for construction of a house or any allied purpose. The Court ordered the Respondents to vacate the land they had illegally occupied, after taking away the material of the house. We pass a similar order in this case. 19. In this connection we wish to say that our ancestors were not fools. They knew that in certain years there may be droughts or water shortages for some other reason, and water was also required for cattle to drink and bathe in etc. Hence they built a pond attached to every village, a tank attached to every temple, etc. These were their traditional rain water harvesting methods, which served them for thousands of years. 20. Over the last few decades, however, most of these ponds in our country have been filled with earth and built upon by greedy people, thus destroying their original character. This has contributed to the water shortages in the country. These were their traditional rain water harvesting methods, which served them for thousands of years. 20. Over the last few decades, however, most of these ponds in our country have been filled with earth and built upon by greedy people, thus destroying their original character. This has contributed to the water shortages in the country. Also, many ponds are auctioned off at throw away prices to businessmen for fisheries in collusion with authorities/Gram Panchayat officials, and even this money collected from these so called auctions are not used for the common benefit of the villagers but misappropriated by certain individuals. The time has come when these malpractices must stop. 23. Before parting with this case we give directions to all the State Governments in the country that they should prepare schemes for eviction of illegal/unauthorized occupants of Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat/Poramboke/Shamlat land and these must be restored to the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat for the common use of villagers of the village. For this purpose the Chief Secretaries of all State Governments/Union Territories in India are directed to do the needful, taking the help of other senior officers of the Governments. The said scheme should provide for the speedy eviction of such illegal occupant, after giving him a show cause notice and a brief hearing. Long duration of such illegal occupation or huge expenditure in making constructions thereon or political connections must not be treated as a justification for condoning this illegal act or for regularizing the illegal possession. Regularization should only be permitted in exceptional cases e.g. where lease has been granted under some Government notification to landless labourers or members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, or where there is already a school, dispensary or other public utility on the land.” 14. As per the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Jagpal (supra) none should be allowed to occupy the land reserved for public purpose and land of water bodies, therefore, eviction of petitioner is totally justified and no fault can be attributed to the impugned orders. Thus, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed in limine. I direct the learned Collector, Haridwar to ensure eviction of the petitioner forthwith, in any case, within two weeks from the date copy of this order is placed before him. Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, Addl. Thus, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed in limine. I direct the learned Collector, Haridwar to ensure eviction of the petitioner forthwith, in any case, within two weeks from the date copy of this order is placed before him. Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand has assured me that order of this Court shall be communicated to Collector, Haridwar within 48 hours. 15. CLMA No. 8936 of 2015 also stands disposed of accordingly.