BISAHMBHAR Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT petition is filed assailing the judgment and order dated 16.06.2003, passed by the Revisional Court / respondent No.1 herein, whereby petitioner was directed to be dis -possessed / evicted from the land Gata No. 165 M, measuring 0.136 hectares, Village Harchandpur, Pargana Manglaur, Tehsil Roorkee, District Haridwar and petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 3,222/ - towards the damages.

(2.) UNDISPUTEDLY , proceedings under Section 122 -B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act was initiated against the petitioner in the year 1995; learned Assistant Collector / Tehsildar, Roorkee, vide order dated 31.08.1995, was pleased to direct the eviction of the petitioner from the land Gata No. 165 -M, judgment and order of the eviction passed by the learned Assistant Collector / Tehsildar, Roorkee dated 31.08.1995 was assailed by the petitioner in Revision No. 27 of 1995, under Section 122 -B (4 -A) of the Act before the Collector, Haridwar; Revision was heard and was allowed by the Revisional Court vide judgment dated 29.01.1996 and order passed by the Assistant Collector / Tehsildar, Roorkee dated 31.08.1996 was set aside and notice issued, under Section 122 -B of the Act read with Rule 115 Gha on Form 49 -A, to the petitioner was discharged; thereafter, second fresh notice dated 28.11.2001, under Section 122 -B of the Act read with Rule 115 Gha and Form 49 -A was issued to the petitioner asking the petitioner to vacate and hand over the possession of the land Gata No. 165, measuring 0.136 hectares to the Gram Sabha and to pay damages of Rs.1,50,000/ -; petitioner appeared before the Assistant Collector / Tehsildar, Roorkee in pursuance to the second notice dated 28.11.2001; defence was taken before the learned Assistant Collector / Tehsildar, Roorkee that since, earlier notice on proforma No. 45 Ka read with Rule 115 Gha and Section 122 -B of the Act was issued to the petitioner and Revisional Court, vide judgment dated 29.01.1996, was pleased to discharge the earlier notice issued to the petitioner after observing that petitioner was not in unauthorized occupation of the Gram Sabha land, therefore, fresh notice issued to the petitioner on 28.11.2001 as well as proceedings under Section 122 -B of the Act was not maintainable and was barred by the principle of res judicata; learned Assistant Collector / Tehsildar Roorkee, vide judgment dated 11.11.2002, was pleased to drop the proceedings of the eviction and was further pleased to withdraw the second notice of the eviction dated 28.11.2001; judgment dated 11.11.2002 rendered by the Assistant Collector / Tehsildar was assailed by the Gram Sabha in Revision No. 35 of 2002 before the Collector Haridwar; learned Collector, Haridwar, vide impugned judgment dated 16th June, 2003 was pleased to allow the revision and was further pleased to set aside the judgment passed by the Assistant Collector dated 11.11.2002 and was further pleased to direct the eviction of the petitioner from the land Gata No. 165 -M, measuring 0.136 hectares and was pleased to direct the petitioner to pay Rs.3,222/ - towards the damages for unauthorized use and occupation of the Gram Sabha land. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has filed preset writ petition.

(3.) I have heard Mr. M.S. Tyagi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Joshi, Addl. C.S.C. for respondent No.1 and have carefully perused the record. As per the office report dated 14.09.2010, envelope containing the notice sent by registered post A.D. to the respondent No. 2 was neither received back undelivered nor AD thereof has been received by the office. Since undelivered envelope sent by the registered post A.D. was not received back even after expiry of 30 days, therefore, service on respondent No. 2 was held to be sufficient vide order dated 16.09.2010. However, none is appearing for respondent No. 2.