LACHMAN Vs. DASHRATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts as set forth by applicant Dashrath in his application under Sec. 198 (4) Z.A. and L.R. Act are : The application dated 23-6-1977 complaints that allotment to Lachman and others is irregular as is made by resolution dated 13-10-1975 and 21-2-1976. The allotment is vitiated because made of land which is less than 8 % of the Gaon Sabha land. That no meeting of L.M.C. was held, no proclamation made by drum beating, members of L.M.C. were not intimated. The previous Pradhan, Ram Pratap has got signature of members affixed on blank paper and have used the same as resolution. The resolution of 21-2-1976 is bad and names of allottees have been recorded in by manoevring Allottee Lachman has been assigned Khasra No. 168 and 309 by resolution dated 21-2-1976. Khasra No. 168 is a place of deity; Khasra No. 309 is Nankhan; a water channel used for irrigation. Allottee Ram Dhani has been given Khasra Minjumla 64 by resolution dated 21-2-1976. This is not cultivable because over it are trees aplenty. Indeed, this land is in possession of applicants and L.M.C. has no concern. The festival of Holika is celebrated over Khasra No. 64 and there is a Panchayati Kalahar over it. By resolution dated 21-2-1976 Khasra No. 64 has been allotted land by resolution dated 13-10-1975. This land is comprised in Khasra No. 309. This land is comprised in Khasra No. 309. This man is invalid and his son is a member of Khasra No. 11/5 and ⅓ are of cultivable and has good number of trees. These are in applicants possession. Khasra No. 309 is Naukhan and Charagah and is used for fishing. The name of Ram Lal has been entered in register by manoebvring. The relief to cancel the allotment by two resolution is prayed for.

(2.) On 6-71978 allottees have filled their objection in position. They have raised land which is less than 8% of the Gaon various points and pleas in rebuttal. On 6-Sabha land. That no meeting of L.M.C. 7-1978 Ram Dass moves an application was held, no proclamation made by drum that applicants have made no allegations beating, members of L.M.C. were not and so his allotment by resolution dated 13-10-1975 be declared valid. On 19-7-1977 Naib Tahsildar submits an enquiry report to Collector. There is a further enquiry report dated 2-7-1976 by Naib Tahsildar addressed to Sub-Divisional Officer. Some oral evidence is recorded and documental evidence is admitted in. Parties have been heard. On 31-8-1978 learned Collector Basti enters an order cancelling the allotment except that of Lachman.

(3.) Aggrieved by this order, Lachman and others file a revision in Commissioner's. On 16-6-1980 Additional Commissioner enters an order of dismissal. So this revision by allottees.