LAWS(UTN)-2012-12-94

ANAND SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Decided On December 28, 2012
ANAND SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. R.C. Arya, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. T.P.S. Takuli, Advocate for respondent nos. 3 to 10.

(2.) IN village Dhandha, Tehsil Kichcha, District Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand, there are agricultural plots being plot No. 58A measuring 176 "bigha" and 13 "biswa" and Plot No. 58 C measuring 56 "bigha". This land admittedly belongs to the State Government and is recorded in revenue records as category five ("Navin Prati"). Regarding this there is no dispute. According to the petitioners, their father was in possession of this land since 1950 -5 1, although no evidence to this effect has been placed before this Court. Petitioners further state that neither their father nor they were ever evicted from this land and they are in peaceful possession of this land since the death of his father on 17.11.1985. The petitioners also contend that in the year 1975, the erstwhile Government of Uttar Pradesh (when Uttarakhand was a part of erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh) formulated a scheme for regularization of unauthorizedly occupied public land. According to the scheme, the occupant had to pay certain amount as premium to the Government and upon such payment, the possession of the occupant was to be regularized and a "patta" or a lease was to be executed in his favour.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY the petitioners and even their father were unauthorized occupants on a State property. The fact remains that the land in question was never regularized in favour of the petitioners or their father. In fact as late as on 12.8.2005 the request of the petitioners for regularisation of such land in their favour was rejected by the Additional Collector, Udham Singh Nagar stating that the concerned land in Village Dhandha, Tehsil Kichcha, having Khasra No. 58A as well as 58C are recorded as category "five" land and this category of land cannot be regularized in their favour.