MEENU SETH Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Adya Prasad Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dhananjai Singh, learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 1, 2 and 8 along with Sri Pankaj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for Gaon Sabha who has been especially called upon by the Court for assisting the matter related to the complex question of law raised by learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) The present petition has been instituted for challenging the order dtd. 23/6/2022 passed by respondent no. 2 under the proceedings initiated under Sec. 104 and 105 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. While adjudicating the proceedings instituted by an alien person one Mr. Santosh Kumar Jaiswal who has been arrayed as respondent no. 3 in the instant petition, who is having a role as an informant before the respondent no. 2 for transfer which has been made by respondent no. 4 to 7 in favour of the petitioner, for treating it being void in terms of Sec. 104 and 105 of the U.P. Revenue Code of 2006, making it clear that the petitioner being purchaser of plot no. 4, 5-m, 6 and 7 situated at Gram BusanpurTehsil Kerakat, District Jaunpur by way of lease deed instituted on 19/12/2018 executed by respondent no. 4 to 7 and as such he had never been a party under the proceedings initiated by respondent no. 2 under Sec. 104 and 105 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

(3.) During pendency of the proceedings in shape of case no. 2264 of 2021 (computerized case no. D2021143600002264) (Santosh Kumar Jaiswal Vs. Meenu Seth and others) a report has been called for and the same was submitted by Sub-Divisional Officer, Tehsil-Kerakat, District Jaunpur, on dtd. 30/7/2021 which was in supplement and addition to the report submitted by Assistant Collector on dtd. 28/6/2021, wherein it is crystal clearly mentioned that the name of respondent no. 4 to 7 has been entered in the revenue records as a Bhumidhar having transferable rights under Sec. 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, only on 6/7/2020 i.e. after the commencement of lease deed executed by respondent no. 4 to 7 in favour of the petitioner.