JAGNNATH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter was adjourned on 25.5.2011 in order to enable the learned Standing counsel to file appropriate affidavits indicating therein as to in what manner the Petitioner's land could be restored. In order to cut short the narration of facts, the order passed on 25.5.2011 is extracted hereinbelow:

(2.) Today three affidavits have been filed by Sri Raj Kumar, the Settlement Officer Consolidation, Jaunpur, Sri Brij Mohan, the Tehsildar, Tehsil Shahganj, District Jaunpur and Sri A.K. Upadhayay, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate concerned which contain almost similar recitals in contents. In paragraph 7 of all the three affidavits, it has been stated that the Petitioners according to the equivalent valuation of the land as claimed by the Petitioner can be restituted by allotment of land over Plot No. 293 M Area 0.055 Hectares. The said land is recorded as Navin Parti, the proposal, therefore, is to restitute the Petitioner over the said land. Further the stand taken by the learned Standing Counsel is that since the land which was allotted to the Petitioner in the year 1987 is of the category as described under Section 132 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, therefore the same cannot be retained by the Petitioner. Sri A.L. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel has relied on the judgment of this Court in the case of Iqbal Ahmad and Ors. v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Deoria and Ors.,2005 98 RevDec 580.

(3.) The stand of the State, therefore, in short is that if the Petitioner is being dislodged, he is being offered equivalent land to which he is entitled in law and, therefore, an order can be passed to that effect. The allotment which was made in the year 1987 vide order dated 16.7.1987 has been recalled on 6.4.2011 and a consequential order has been passed on 8.4.2011 which has been challenged by way of amendment as noted in the order dated 25.5.2011.