BABULAL Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri K.K. Tiwari and Sri Vimlendra Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri J.N. Yadav and Sri B.L. Yadav, learned counsel for the lease holder- private respondent No. 8, Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha and Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

(2.) The petitioner before this Court has been a complainant in respect of grant of residential leases to various villagers way back in the year 1973.

(3.) The petitioner vide paragraph 8 to the writ petition has taken specific plea that petitioner's father was one of the eligible persons for the purposes of allotment of the residential lease upon the land which was reserved for persons belonging to the scheduled caste, however, there are certain backward class persons who have been wholly illegally granted lease. In paragraph 8 to the writ petition it has been averred that the petitioner being harijan is entitled to have lease of the land in question. It is argued that grant of residential lease belonging to other backward caste (OBC) was an act of fraud and, therefore, the complaint even if made after lapse of 46 years, it was sufficient enough for exercise of suo motu power under Sec. 198(4) of the erstwhile U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1950 or the provisions contained under Sec. 66 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.