MANJU SINGH Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the petitioner. The writ petition has been filed for quashing the application moved by Naeem Ahmad (respondent -4) u/s 198(4) of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 for cancellation of the patta granted in favour of the petitioner as well as 18 other persons.

(2.) THE counsel for the petitioner submits that Naeem Ahmad (respondent -4) is resident of village Anjana, while the land in dispute is in village Bhadwa. Accordingly, he is not an aggrieved person and is not entitled to file the application u/s 198(4) of the Act. He further submits that the validity of the patta has already been approved from the stage of Commissioner in earlier proceedings, accordingly, a fresh proceeding for the same purpose, is merely harassment of the petitioner and other allottees. In such circumstances, the application moved by the petitioner was liable to be dismissed, however,the Collector has called for a report in the matter from the Naib Tahsildar.

(3.) THE other ground raised by the petitioner that the validity of the patta has already been upheld upto the stage of Commissioner, is also a substantial ground. In the circumstances, the petitioner may file an application before the Collector, Allahabad, raising preliminary points in the matter within a period of ten days. In case any application is filed, then the Collector may decide the preliminary issues raised by the petitioner before proceeding in the matter, within a period of two months thereafter, after hearing the parties concerned. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.