MOHD. YAMIN Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitioners are residents of village Jalalabad, Pargana Thana Bhawn, District Muzaffarnagar. All the petitioners claim to be landless agricultural labourers, belonging to the scheduled caste and other backward community. They applied for allotment of land in their favour under Section 122 of U.P.Z.A&L.R. Act. The allotment orders in this behalf were issued by Sub Divisional Officer on 27.2.1979. After the allotment they were put in possession of the land allotted in their favour. On an application moved by one Niyamatullah and others seeking cancellation of the allotment orders before the Additional Collector under Section 198(4) of the UPZA & LR Act, the Additional Collector issued notices to the parties. An order was passed by the Additional Collector cancelling the allotment in favour of the petitioners on 5.8.1981. Revision against the said order was preferred before the Additional Commissioner, Meerut. An application for impleadment of some of the petitioners were filed before the Additional Commissioner. The revision petition was dismissed on 3.3.1982. However, one set of the petitioners amongst the petitioners herein filed a revision before the Board of Revenue. An application for impleadment of some of the petitioners were filed before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue allowed the application for impleadment as petitioners. Revision Petition was allowed and the case was remanded back to the Additional Collector to pass a fresh decision. On remand the Additional Collector after hearing the parities, holding a detailed inquiry, found that the allotment in favour of the petitioners was not valid. A revision was filed against the order before the Additional Commissioner, Saharanpur who vide order dated 22.12.1998 dismissed the revision petition. Under these circumstances, the present writ petition is filed.

(2.) I have heard counsel for the parties.

(3.) A short grievance of the petitioners is that the land defined as public utility land in U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act was allotted to the petitioners by respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The allotment of land reserved for public utility can be allotted to a person without confirmation of Bhumidhari rights. This is clearly contemplated by Section 132 of the Act that no Bhumidhari right shall accrue in lands set apart for public purposes under the Consolidation of Holdings Act.