DHARAM SINGH Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.K. Purwar for the contesting respondent no. 4 and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2. Learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha is not present. None of the other respondents have put forth any contest to this petition.

(2.) The petitioners are allottees of certain land by the Gaon Sabha under the provisions of Section 198 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950. The respondent no. 4 who is the erstwhile gram pradhan appears to have complained against the said allotment proceedings as being without authority in law and one of the major grounds raised was that the Sub Divisional Magistrate had no authority to approve the said allotments after 20th July, 2002, inasmuch as, the said power had been conferred on the Assistant Collector (Tehsildar) of the area concerned. It is undisputed that by a subsequent amendment the powers have again now been vested in the Sub Divisional Magistrate. The fact remains that in the present case the Sub Divisional Magistrate has passed the order of approving the lease on 25th July, 2002 which is during the period when the amendment was operating.

(3.) This complaint of the respondent no. 4 has been accepted and the lease of the petitioner has been cancelled as the impugned orders clearly recite that the lease has been approved by an incompetent authority. The petitioners have come up before this Court challenging the said orders on the ground that the aforesaid orders proceed on a misconception of law and also on erroneous assumptions of fact, inasmuch as, the amending Act did confer powers on the Tehsildar, but a subsequent approval by the Sub Divisional Magistrate does not entirely annul the allotment proceedings. At the most, the Tehsildar may be required to reconsider the matter with regard to approval in the event it is found that there is no approval of the Tehsildar.