BAPU CHARITABLE SOCIETY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 1st March, 2011 issued by respondent No. 3 rejecting the claim of the petitioner for freehold rights alongwith the order dated 21st February, 2011 referred to in the order dated 1st March, 2011.

(2.) Brief facts of the case as emerge from the pleadings of the parties in the writ petition are; Plot No. 287 area 1.69 acre situate in village Paret Chhawani, Etawah is a Nazul land which is recorded in the revenue record as Bunjar under the management of the Collector. The State Government had issued various Government orders beginning from Government order dated 23rd May, 1992 by which policy for granting freehold rights was enforced. The last such Government order dated 21st October, 2008 was issued by the State Government modifying the earlier policy and laying down new conditions for grant of freehold rights. In the year 2003, the petitioner-society had applied for freehold rights of the Plot No. 287 but the same was not granted. The petitioner again submitted an application dated 29th November, 2008 for freehold. A report was submitted by the tahsil authorities on the said application that plot in question is recorded as Nazul land which was entered in the Zild Bandobast in the name of Malikan Sarkar Bahadur and in the Non Z.A. Khatauni the plot is recorded as Bunjar under the management of Collector, Etawah. The petitioner submitted various reminders for granting freehold rights. The last reminder dated 12th July, 2010 submitted by the petitioner has been filed as Annexure-8 to the writ petition.

(3.) The impugned order dated 1st March, 2011 has been passed rejecting the application of the petitioner for freehold rights giving various reasons. One of the reasons given in the order impugned is that in accordance with the Government order dated 21st October, 2008 lessee or his heirs or nominee of lessee can make an application for grant of freehold rights. It was stated in the order that petitioner is neither lessee nor heir of the lessee nor nominee of lessee hence its application cannot be granted.