MAKSOODA KHATOON Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of this case are that a report was submitted to the effect that the applicant has purchased land belonging to one Jagat who was alleged to be Scheduled Caste. This sale deed was in violation of Sec. 157-A of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, and, as per Sec. 167 of the Act, the Collector was authorised to take possession of the land. The proceedings are pending before the Additional Collector. It was argued on behalf of the applicant that since consolidation has started in the village, the proceedings should abate in view of Sec. 5(2) of the U.P. CH Act. The Additional Collector rejected this plea by this order dated 7.12.1987, and the Commissioner, Bareilly Division, rejected the revision by his order dated 27.7.1988

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned DGC (Revenue)

(3.) The learned counsel for the applicant has cited a ruling of the Honourable Supreme Court reported in 1973 RD 423 wherein the scope of Sec. 5(2) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act has been discussed in detail. Their Lordships have held that the scope of this Sec. is very wide. In this case it was held suits, for possession under Sec. 209 will also abate because adjudication on rights is involved. Even suits in which the validity of a sale deed is challenged, will abate.