NARESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the controversy involved in all the aforesaid writ petitions is same, therefore, for the sake of convenience all the writ petitions are being decided by this common judgment Writ Petition No. 1062(M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 09/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1100 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 05/2010-11, Writ Petition No. 1101 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 1672011-12, Writ Petition No. 1102 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 12/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1103 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 17/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1104 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 06/2010-11, Writ Petition No. 1105 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 10/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1106 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 07/2010-11, Writ Petition No. 1107 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 10/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1108 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 13/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1109 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 14/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1110 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 15/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1111 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 16/2010-11, Writ Petition No. 1112 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 18/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1113 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 20/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1114 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 09/2010-11, Writ Petition No. 1063 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 18/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1064 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 19/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1065 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 24/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1066 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 26/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1326 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 02/2011-12, and order dated 18-6-2012 passed in Appeal No. 04/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1327 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 15/2010-11, and order dated 18-6-2012, passed in Appeal No. 05/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1328 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 01/2010-11, and order dated 18-6-2012, passed in Appeal No. 01/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1329 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 02/2010-11, and order dated 18-6-2012, passed in Appeal No. 06/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1332 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 23/2011-12, and order dated 18-6-2012, passed in Appeal No. 02/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1333 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 104-2012, passed in Case No. 14/2010-11, and order dated 18-6-2012, passed in Appeal No. 03/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1271 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 12/2010-11, Writ Petition No. 1273 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 22/2011-12, Writ Petition No. 1274 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 21/2011-12, and Writ Petition No. 1277 (M/S) of 2012 has been filed against the order dated 10-4-2012, passed in Case No. 13/2010-11.

(2.) Brief facts of the cases giving rise to these writ petitions are that in W.P. Nos. 1271, 1273, 1274, 1277, 1332, 1333 the petitioners were applicants in exchange applications and in rest petitions the petitioners are the purchasers of the land, who purchased that after the order of exchange of the Assistant collector from the tenure holders, who are not members of Scheduled Tribes. It is pleaded that the applications U/s. 161 of U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Act were filed before the Up Ziladhikari/Assistant Collector (sic) Class, Haridwar for permission of exchange of the land. The Assistant Collector Haridwar called for report from Tehsildar Haridwar. The Tehsildar Haridwar gave his reports on different dates and recommended for the exchange, mentioning therein that there is no objection to any party by the exchange of land and no harm is going to be caused to any one and the land-revenue of the lands is almost equal or difference is less than 10%. The Up Ziladhikari/Assistant Collector allowed the exchange applications and directed to record the names of the parties in revenue records vice-versa vide orders passed in change cases on different dates.

(3.) Thereafter on 4-4-2012, Sri Bipin Chandra Dwivedi, Advocate practicing in the District Court Roshanabad Haridwar, made a complaint to the Collector Haridwar that Section 157B of Z.A. and L.R. Act, imposes restrictions on transfer of land by members of Scheduled Tribe to the member of general category and prayer was made to enquire in the matters of exchange of land by the petitioners to the persons belonging to general category.