Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2322 (ALL)

RAMESH CHANDRA GAUTAM v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2017-10-09

RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA)

body2017
JUDGMENT : Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J. Heard Sri Alok Kumar Yadav, for the petitioners and Standing Counsel, for State of U.P. 2. The writ petition has been filed against the order of Additional Collector (Judicial) dated 31.08.2017, cancelling the allotment of the land for house sites of the petitioners granted by Sub-Divisional Officer on 20.02.2014 and for mandamus commanding the respondents, not to evict them from the land allotted to them. 3. It has been stated that the petitioners are landless agricultural labourers and permanent residents of village Suriyawan Patti Jorawar Singh, tahsil and district Bhadohi. Ramesh Chandra Gautam (petitioner-1) belongs to 'Scheduled Caste' and other petitioners belong to 'Other Backward Classes'. Plot 279-ka (area 0.092 hectare) situated at village Suriyawan Patti Jorawar Singh was old parati land and vacant on the spot. The petitioners moved an application before Sub-Divisional Officer for allotment of the land for house-sites as they had no dwelling house. On the application of petitioners a report has been called for. Lekhpal submitted his report dated 15.09.2013, which was forwarded by Tahsildar with his endorsement dated 22.09.2013, reporting that plot 279-ka (area 0.092 hectare) situated at village Suriyawan Patti Jorawar Singh was old parati land and vacant on the spot. The petitioners are landless agricultural labourers belonging to 'Scheduled Caste' and "Other backward Classes". They were permanent residents of village Suriyawan Patti Jorawar Singh and eligible for allotment of the land for house-sites. The Member of Ward-4 of Nagar Palika Suriyawan has also given no objection for allotment of the aforesaid plots to the petitioners. In the report, the petitioners were proposed for allotment of an area of 0.013 hectare of plot 279-Ka on a lease rent of Rs 250/- each. Sub-Divisional Officer approved this report by order dated 20.02.2014. 4. Nand Lal, Chairman, Nagar Palika, Suriyawan, Bhadohi filed an application dated 15.06.2015, before the Collector, for cancellation of allotment and ejecting the petitioners from the land in dispute. It has been stated in the application that Town Area Committee, Suriyawan, Bhadohi was constituted by notification of State of U.P. dated 19.05.1978 (published in official gazette on 29.05.1978). From that day disputed plot was vested in Town Area Committee, Suriyawan, Bhadohi. On repeal of Town Areas Act, 1914, in 1994, it was renamed as Nagar Palika, Suriyawan and Sub - Divisional Officer has no jurisdiction to allot land vested in Nagar Palika, Suriyawan. From that day disputed plot was vested in Town Area Committee, Suriyawan, Bhadohi. On repeal of Town Areas Act, 1914, in 1994, it was renamed as Nagar Palika, Suriyawan and Sub - Divisional Officer has no jurisdiction to allot land vested in Nagar Palika, Suriyawan. On the basis of allotments, the petitioners are encroaching over plot 279-Ka, which is a part of talab land. On this application, a report was called for. 5. Lekhpal submitted his report dated 28.02.2016, stating that plot 279-ka (area 0.092 hectare) situated at village Suriyawan Patti Jorawar Singh was old parati land and vacant on the spot. The petitioners were allotted an area of 0.013 hectare of plot 279-Ka on a lease rent of Rs 250/-each, in exercise of suo moto power by Sub-Divisional Officer by order dated 20.02.2014. Report for allotment was prepared by Azad Singh, Lekhpal and forwarded by Arun Rai, Revenue Inspector. After allotments, names of allottees were mutated on 03.06.2015 by Akhileshwar Singh, Revenue Inspector. This report was forwarded by Tahsildar with his endorsement dated 03.04.2016. 6. Additional Collector, after hearing the parties, by order dated 31.08.2017, held that land in dispute was vested in Nagar Palika Suryawan and Sub-Divisional had no jurisdiction to allot the disputed land. On these findings, order of allotment dated 20.02.2014 has been canceled. Hence this writ petition has been filed. 7. I have considered the arguments of the counsel for the petitioners and examined the record. It has not been disputed that the disputed land situates within the limit of Nagar Panchayat Suriyawan as such under Rule-3-AAA of U.P. Panchayat Raj Rules, 1947, the disputed land was transferred and vested in Nagar Panchayat, Suriyawan on the date of notification dated 29.05.1978. Nagar Panchayat has been given power of protection, allotment and disposal of property under Section 118 of U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916. Under notification dated 24.02.2001, Nagar Panchayat can grant temporary patta for agricultural purposes of the agricultural land vested in it. There is no provisions for allotment of land for house sites to landless persons. 8. Nagar Panchayat has been given power of protection, allotment and disposal of property under Section 118 of U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916. Under notification dated 24.02.2001, Nagar Panchayat can grant temporary patta for agricultural purposes of the agricultural land vested in it. There is no provisions for allotment of land for house sites to landless persons. 8. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that State of U.P. in exercise of its power under Section 117-A of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951, can authorize a gaon sabha to perform, discharge and exercise, the functions, duties and power assigned, imposed or conferred under U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 or U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, in relation to the holding, situated within local authority. State of U.P. by notification No. 465/Nau-8-2001-48 (1)/94 dated 24.02.2001, adopted the provisions of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. Sub-Divisional Officer has authority to allot land for house sites suo moto under Section 122-C of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. State of U.P. by notification No. 365/I-A-21(2)-68 dated 05.12.1968, empowered Sub-Divisional Officers to discharge all functions of the Collector under U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. In present case, land was transferred and vested in Town Area Committee, Suriyawan on 29.05.1978. Order of allotment dated 20.02.2014 passed by Sub-Divisional was within his jurisdiction under Section 122-C of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. Finding of Additional Collector in this respect is incorrect. There is no finding that the petitioners were not eligible for allotment of land or order of allotment has been secured by committing fraud. Several persons were allotted land situated within Nagar Panchayat Suriyawan by Sub-Divisional Officer. Chairman has not taken any proceeding for cancellation of their allotment. Action against the petitioners is malafide and discriminatory. Impugned order is liable to be set aside. 9. The petitioners could not show any notification of State of U.P. issued under Section 117-A authorizing gaon sabha to exercise its powers in relation to the land vested in Nagar Panchayat Suriyawan. So far as notification dated 24.02.2001, is concerned, it no where authorizes gaon sabha to exercise its power over land of local authority. Rather guidelines have been issued for protection, allotment and disposal of property vested in local authorities. Thus Sub-Divisional Officer had no jurisdiction to allot the land vested in municipalities. Illegal and unauthorized act cannot be made basis for passing legal order. Rather guidelines have been issued for protection, allotment and disposal of property vested in local authorities. Thus Sub-Divisional Officer had no jurisdiction to allot the land vested in municipalities. Illegal and unauthorized act cannot be made basis for passing legal order. Impugned order does not suffer from any illegality. 10. The writ petition has no merit and it is dismissed.