ZILA PANCHAYAT Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:-

(2.) BRIEFLY stated that petitioner is the recorded owner of Plot Khasra No. 4124 to 4187 measuring 28 Nali 1 Muthi land situated in village Lohakot, Patti Dewalthal, Tehsil-Didihat, District Pithoragarh. In a portion of said land, Dak Bungalow of Zila Panchayat is situated and remaining part of the land is appurtenant land of the same. In the year 1979, the said Dak Bungalow was given to the Health Department on rent. It is further stated in the petition that respondent no. 4 Rami Ram was employed as Chaukidar in Zila Panchayat who was looking after the said Dak Bungalow with appurtenant land till 1979 when he was removed from the said post. It is stated in the petition that Patwari, Dewalthal submitted a complaint on 25.07.1991 to the Prescribed Authority/S.D.M., Pithoragarh against the respondent no.4 stating therein that he was in unauthorized occupation of the land in Khata No. 1 Plot Nos. 4130 to 4168, 4172, 4173, 4279, 4180 to 4184 total 47 plots measuring total 20 Nali 10 Muthis, which belonging to Zila Panchayat, Pithoragarh and on the basis of said complaint, proceedings under U.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) were initiated against respondent no.4. In this regard a case was registered and a notice was issued by the Prescribed Authority/S.D.M. Didihat, Pithoragarh to the respondent no.4 under Section 4 (1) of the Act. The respondent no.4 turned up before the Prescribed Authority and submitted his objection on 09.09.1991 wherein he admitted that the land in question belongs to the petitioner and he will vacate the same on the directions of the Zila Panchayat. The Prescribed Authority also issued notice to the petitioner and the petitioner in turn also submitted written statement before the Prescribed Authority on 18.11.1991. Both the parties led their oral and documentary evidence before the Prescribed Authority and vide order dated 02.06.1992, the Prescribed Authority passed the ejectment order evicting the respondent no.4 from the land in dispute. Being aggrieved by the said order the respondent no.4 filed appeal before the District Judge, Pithoragarh, which was registered as Misc. Appeal No. 23/1992 and the said appeal was allowed by the District Judge vide order dated 18.08.1993. After getting copy of the order of the Appellante Court, the petitioner moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 C.P.C. with the request to implead the petitioner as respondent no.2 in the misc. appeal but the learned District Judge vide order dated 27.05.1995 dismissed the said application. Hence this petition.

(3.) ON the other hand Mr. Argind Vashishtha, Advocate appearing for respondent no.4/a to 4/c submitted that the respondent has illegally been ejected from the land in dispute by the Prescribed Authority but the learned Appellant Court while allowing the appeal preferred by the respondent Rami Ram has rectified the mistake committed by the Prescribed Authority as the matter relating to land in question cannot be decided under Public Premises Act. He submitted that the contesting parties have duly been heard in the appeal.