TEJPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The land in question, in its entirety, is admittedly situated within the State of Uttarakhand. Petitioner contends that the land in question vests in Gram Sabha, whereas the State of Uttar Pradesh contends that the same was used for irrigation purposes and as such vested in it and remained with its Irrigation Department. State of Uttar Pradesh is purporting to settle the land in question through the Executive Engineer of the Irrigation Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh. In terms of Section 79 of the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the said "Act"), the properties mentioned therein, including the land in question, as claimed by the State of Uttar Pradesh, is required to be settled in favour of the State of Uttarakhand in terms of the agreement inter se the State of Uttarakhand and the State of Uttar Pradesh and, on failure thereof within two years from the appointed date, as may be directed by the Central Government. There has been failure on the part of the State of Uttar Pradesh and the State of Uttarakhand to arrive at an agreement inter se them, as was contemplated in Section 79 of the Act and, accordingly, it is now the obligation of the Central Government to do what it was required to do in terms of the said Section. The Central Government has not done so on the plea that it has not yet been able to constitute the Ganga Management Board in terms of Section 80 of the Act. Since what was required to be done under Section 79 has not been done, the State of Uttar Pradesh still remains in control of the properties mentioned in Section 79 of the Act. The Central Government has said that till such time the Ganga Management Board is constituted, the State of Uttar Pradesh would continue to manage the properties mentioned in Section 79 of the Act.

(2.) In such view of the matter, though the property in question is within the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Uttarakhand, the State of Uttar Pradesh is purporting to contend that it has still right over the property in question and, accordingly, it can deal with the same as if it belongs to it. We do not think that State of Uttar Pradesh has any such right. In view of the provisions of the said Act, all the properties, which came within the territory of State of Uttarakhand, became exclusive properties of the State of Uttarakhand, which can only be dealt with by the State of Uttarakhand and by no one else. The State of Uttar Pradesh has no right to deal with any such property. Long time back, in terms of provisions of Section 79 of the Act, the State of Uttar Pradesh was required to handover all those properties, mentioned in the said Section, to the State of Uttarakhand. But, for the default on the part of the Central Government, the State of Uttar Pradesh is still continuing to be the manager of the said property. As aforesaid, they lost proprietary right in the property in question and have only managerial right therein, until such time, the properties mentioned in Section 79 of the Act are dealt with in the manner prescribed therein. As such manager, the State of Uttar Pradesh has no right to deal with any such property. The property, being the subject matter of the writ petition, being situated admittedly within the State of Uttarakhand, even assuming that the said property is a part of the properties mentioned in Section 79 of the Act, it is declared that the State of Uttar Pradesh was and continued to be a mere manager of the said property since the formation of the State of Uttarakhand and, accordingly, has no right to deal with, dispose of or encumber the said property in any manner whatsoever.

(3.) We, accordingly, confirm the interim order, allow the writ petition and restrain the State of Uttar Pradesh and all its servants and officers from dealing with, disposing of or encumbering any part of the property in question and, if they have done so after formation of the State of Uttarakhand, to forthwith revoke the same.