AMBIKA PRASAD Vs. COLLECTOR SITAPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two writ petitions, common questions of law and fact are Involved. They were, therefore, heard together and are being disposed of by this common Judgment. Writ Petition No. 276 of 2002 shall be the leading case.

(2.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for Issuance of writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 12.4.2001 passed under Section 122B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (for short "the Act"), directing the ejectment of the petitioner and awarding damages against him and the order dated 28.11.2001 whereby the revision filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the order passed by the Collector was partly allowed and the amount of damages was enhanced to Rs. 5,000.

(3.) It appears that a portion of Plot Nos. 281M and 289 of village Patti Sawai, district Sitapur. which were recorded as Navin Parti in the revenue papers, was given to the petitioner by the Pradhan of the village after accepting a premium of Rs. 300. The petitioner after paying the premium of Rs. 300 raised some constructions in the land in dispute. The Lekhpal of the village reported to the respondent No. 2, the Assistant Collector, Tahsll Laharpur, Sitapur that the petitioner was in unauthorised occupation of land in dispute which was owned by the Gram Sabha. On the basis of the said report, notice on Form No. 49A, framed under the Act, was issued to the petitioner to show cause as to why he be not evicted from the said land. On the receipt of the said notice, the petitioner submitted his explanation to the effect that the land was given to him by the Pradhan of the village after accepting Rs. 300 as premium and since then he was in possession thereof and he was not in unauthorised possession of the land in dispute, therefore, he was not liable to ejectment from the same. Parties in support of their cases produced evidence. Respondent No. 2 after going through the material on record came to the conclusion that the land in dispute was owned by the Gram Sabha. The same was illegally and unauthorisedly occupied by the petitioner as the Pradhan of the village had no authority to allot the land in dispute to the petitioner, that too without permission of the competent authority. The petitioner was, therefore, liable to ejectment from the said land. Having recorded the said findings, order of ejectment was passed and damages were also awarded by respondent No. 2 against the petitioner according to the rules, by Judgment and order dated 12.4.2001. Against the said Judgment and order, no revision was filed by the petitioner as such the order of ejectment and award of damages, as awarded by respondent No. 2. became final. However, a revision was filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the said order for enhancement of the amount of damages. The revisional court affirmed the findings recorded by respondent No. 2 on the questions Involved in the case and also held that the amount of damages awarded by respondent No. 2 was inadequate. He, therefore, enhanced the same from Rs. 300 to Rs. 5,000 by his judgment and order dated 28.11.2001. Hence, the present petition.