RAM RATI Vs. GRAM SAMAJ JEHWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution arising out of proceedings under the U. P. Consolida tion of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) ONE Smt. Dhanraj Kuar died leav ing some grove and agricultural plots which she had inherited from her husband. She had acquired Bhutnidhari rights in respect of the agricultural plots before her death. Du ring the consolidation proceedings the Gaon Sabha, Jehwa moved an application before the Consolidation Officer claiming that as Smt. Dhanraj Kuer had died heirless her entire holding vested in the Gram Samaj. The original petitioners Bhagwan Singh and Lalloo Singh filed objection laying claim to the estate of the deceased widow on the basis of:-

(3.) SECTION 5 (1) (c) (ii) of the Act enacts that no tenure-holder, except with the permission in writing of the Settlement Offi cer (Consolidation) previously obtained shall transfer by way of sale, gift or exchange any part of his holding in the consolidation area. Full Bench of this court in Smt. Asharfunissa Begum v. Dy. Director of Consolidation Camp at Hardoi, AIR 1971 All 87 (FB). has taken the view that the expression "any part of his holding" did not include the entire holding so that the ban applied only where a part of holding was transferred and not when the holding was transferred as a whole. The learned Judge noticed the Hindi version of Section 5 (1) (c) (ii) of the Act which leads: