GURU PRASAD Vs. COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, DEHRADUN & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

(2.) Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:

(3.) The first contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is the actual owner of the property in question and the respondent no. 3 has purchased the land in question from the Recovery Manager of the U.P. State Land Development Cooperative Bank Ltd., Dehradun, which is apparently illegal. Another contention is that the land in question belongs to the Scheduled Caste, inasmuch as, the petitioner is a Scheduled Caste and, in view of Section 157-A of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, the said land could not be transferred in favour of respondent no. 3 without prior permission of the Collector.