NANAK CHAND Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel who has invited the attention of the Court to the government order dated 30.12.1985.

(2.) The contention is that the leases granted to the contesting respondents deserve to be cancelled for which the petitioners had approached the Collector of the district, for such cancellation under the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 198 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. The prayer is for a direction to the Collector to decide the said application.

(3.) Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the government order, produced by the learned Standing Counsel it is evident that the leases which have been allegedly granted to the contesting respondents are for social forestry and plantation of trees. Such plantation is permissible under the government order dated 30.12.1985. There is no specific provision for grant of such leases under the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. Section 126 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act makes a provision empowering the State Government to issue necessary directions to be carried out by the subordinate authorities. The Government Order dated 30.12.1985 has been issued in exercise of such powers. The power to manage the land vested in the Gaon Sabha is provided for under section 122-A of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. No amendment has been pointed out as contemplated under Clause 21 of the said Government Order. In such a situation the leases granted to the contesting respondents cannot be treated to be a statutory lease under the provisions of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act as in the case of Abadi sites or for agricultural purposes. At the best it is a privilege under the government order dated 30.12.1985. If the lease is not under the provisions of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act as referred to herein above, then in such a situation the cancellation thereof cannot be under taken under sub-section (4) of section 198 of the Act.