HEMLATA SINGH Vs. COLLECTOR, DISTRICT PITHORAGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "Chutzpah" is a remarkable expression in Hebrew. Chutzpah is said to happen when a man kills his mother and father and then asks for clemency on the ground that he is now an orphan. Analogically speaking, there is something of a "Chutzpah" in the present case.

(2.) The Petitioner has challenged the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Berinag (District Pithoragarh) dated 2-5-2006 as well as that of the District Magistrate, Fithoragarh dated 13-9-2007, on the grounds that the same are illegal and without jurisdiction. In fact, a bare perusal of order dated 2-5-2006 would show that the said order which has been passed after a due enquiry, merely reiterates the position of law as it exists in the State of Uttarakhand. The Act relevant for the purposes is U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (from hereinafter referred to as the Ceiling Act). The Legislature had passed the Ceiling Act in order to restrict land holding of a tenure holder to a certain limit and, thereafter, declare any excess land as surplus, and all such surplus land was to vest in the State. At the same time, certain categories of land such as the land used for tea, coffee or rubber plantation have been exempted from the purview of the Ceiling Act. Yet, the Ceiling Act also places certain restrictions on the transfer of such exempted category of land and stipulates that any transfer of this land without prior permission of the State Government would be void. The Sub Divisional Magistrate after holding an enquiry has passed the order dated 2-5-2006 wherein, inter alia, certain instructions have also been given to the relevant officers that since there is a restriction in the Ceiling Act and it has been brought to the notice of the Government and confirmed in the enquiry that in spite of the restrictions under the Ceiling Act, the transfer of the land which is under tea cultivation is going on without any prior permission of the Government. As such, the Sub Divisional Magistrate has instructed officers not to register any such transfers of land, apart from giving other instructions. This order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate dated 2-5-2006 was earlier challenged by the Petitioner before this Court in the Writ Petition (M/S) No. 885 of 2007. The said writ petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge vide his order dated 31-7-2007 directing the Petitioner to move a representation before the District Magistrate, Pithoragarh and further directed the District Magistrate, Pithoragarh to dispose of the said representation. Consequently, the Petitioner had filed a detail representation before the District Magistrate, Pithoragarh, which was decided by the District Magistrate, Pithoragarh vide his order dated 13-9-2007. The District Magistrate, has held in his well considered order dated 13-9-2007 that the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Berinag is just, proper and in accordance with law and rejected all the claims made by the Petitioner.

(3.) A stage therefore was reached for the Petitioner to go for another round of litigation challenging the "legality" of both the administrative orders i.e. 2-5-2006 and 13-9-2007 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate and the District Magistrate, Pithoragarh respectively. It is these two orders which are presently under challenge before this Court in this writ petition.