DEO NARAIN Vs. TEJAI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference made by learned Additional Commissioner, Allahabad in a case under Rule 115-P of the UPZA and LR Rules whereby he has recommended that the order of the trial Court be set aside and the case be remand back to it for fresh decision after affording an opportunity to both the parties to lead evidence.

(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts of the case are that proceeding for cancellation were initiated on an application moved on 31-3-90 on the ground that the leases which were granted through resolution dated 15-12-87 and 21-9-88 are liable to be cancelled because the leases arc not granted according to proce­dure and rules and the land in dispute is not vacant on the spot. The lease-holders are not eligible persons neither any Munadi was done nor any meeting was held by the Land Management Commit­tee. On an evaluation of the evidence of the parties the trial Court held the leases to be valid and rejected the application dated 31-3-90. Against the order of the trial Court a revision was preferred before the Additional Commissioner, Allahabad who has made the above reference.

(3.) A perusal of the records reveals that the learned trial Court did not care to dispose of the case in a proper judicial manner. It did not summon the Allotment File in order to judge whether provisions of Rules 173 to 176 of ZA and LR Rules had been followed or not. The learned Additional Commissioner after taking the entire material on record into considera­tion has rightly opined that the matter could be remanded back to the trial Court for fresh decisions.