DAYA RAM Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 3.

(2.) UNDER section 21(1)(e) of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, it is provided that every person who on the date immediately preceding the date of vesting occupied or held a land as a non -occupancy tenant of pasture land or of land covered by water and used for the purpose of growing singhara or other produce or of land in the bed of a river and used for casual or occasional cultivation shall be deemed to be Asami thereof. Under section 129 of the Act, Asami is one of the classes of tenure -holders. Under section 133 of the Act, Asami (Asami rights) are defined. Under clause (a) of the said section it is mentioned that a person who as a consequence of the acquisition of estate becomes an asami under section 21 shall have asami rights under the Act. Under Clause -C of section 133 of the Act it is mentioned that every person, who on or after the date of vesting, is admitted by the Land Management Committee or the person entitled as a lessee of land described in section 132 shall have asami rights under the Act. Under section 146 it is provided that Asami shall have right to exclusive possession of all land comprised in his holding, however under section 153 it is provided that interest of an asami shall not be transferable. Under section 170, it is provided that an asami can bequeath by Will his holding. However under section 171 of the Act after the death of an asami the land devolves upon his heirs as mentioned in the said section.

(3.) THE Courts below have decided the matter against the petitioner treating him (or his father) to be lessee of gaon sabha land covered by section 132 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. Rule 176 -A under which the impugned orders have been passed also refers to lease made to an asami by the gaon sabha. However, the case of the petitioner is that his father was asami under section 21(1)(e) of the Act. Neither the petitioner claimed to be lessee on behalf of gaon sabha nor any such thing is mentioned in the impugned orders. If the allegation of the petitioner that the name of his father was entered as asami since zamindari abolition and his name continued in the revenue records as such and after the death of his father petitioner's name was mutated in the revenue records in the same capacity is correct then petitioner is not liable to eviction.