MUNNILAL Vs. COMMISSIONER, AZAMGARH DIVISION, AZAMGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the time of hearing no one appeared for respondent No. 4 even though the case was taken up on the revised list. Accordingly, only the arguments of learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 3 were heard.

(2.) Respondent No. 4, Ram Prasad was the complainant on whose application proceedings for cancellation of patta granted to the petitioner were initiated. The first order which has been challenged through this writ petition is dated 22.9.1997 passed by C.R.O./A.D.M. (L.R.), Azamgarh in Case No. 477/562 under section 198(4) of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, Ram Prasad v. Munnilal. Copy of the said order is Annexure-IV to the writ petition. Ram Prasad had challenged the patta granted in favour of the petitioner of Gaon Sabha Plot No. 533, area 0.17 acres and Plot No. 340, area 0.17 acres situate in village Mirzapur Tappa Bela and Pargana Bela Daultabad Tehsil Lalganj District Azamgarh. The property in dispute is entered in the revenue records as pond and is situate near the road. It was further alleged that Munni Lal who was Pradhan had allotted the land in dispute to his son Ram Chandra (a residential patta), however the said allotment was not approved by S.D.O. Lalganj through order dated 18.5.1985, which order was challenged in the Civil Court but the suit was dismissed (O.S. No. 105 of 1986, dismissed on 31.1.1994). It was further alleged that thereafter Munnilal showing forged signatures of previous deceased Pradhan Chauthi Yadav manufactured a patta in his own name purporting to be of the year 1969 and then through application under sections 33/39, Land Revenue Act got his name mutated on 30.9.1993. Application for cancellation of patta was filed on 14.6.1994.

(3.) Even in consolidation records, the land in dispute was shown to be a phokhri (small pond). In the impugned order it is mentioned that S.D.O. passed the order of mutation of the name of petitioner on 30.9.1993. Ultimately, C.R.O. cancelled the approval of mutation of name of the petitioner through order dated 22.9.1997. Against the said order, restoration application was filed which was rejected by Collector, Azamgarh on 22.6.1998 (Annexure-V to the writ petition). Thereafter petitioner filed revision No. 150/A of 2000. Commissioner, Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh dismissed the revision on 31.7.2000 (Annexure-VII to the writ petition). All these three orders have been challenged through this writ petition. Revisional Court held that if in fact some patta had been granted to the petitioner, then during consolidation he should have raised the objections regarding entry of his name.