HINDUPAT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been directed against the order passed by Additional Commissioner, Jhansi Division in Revision No. 180/104 of 92-93 dated 15-12-1995 arising out of an order of Patta cancellation under Section 198(4) of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, dated 27-2-91 passed by Additional Collector Lalitpur in Suit No. 1363/79-80.

(2.) THE main contention of the revisionist is that the Courts below have committed error of law and fact treating the disputed land as Patta land and cancelling the same. The said land was never granted to him on Patta rather it was given to him under the C.L.R.D. scheme. The trial Court wrongly presumed that in the absence of any declaratory proceedings on behalf of the revisionist the land will be treated as Gaon Sabha land given on lease to the revisionist and since the revisionist was not eligible for land allotment having 18.45 acres of land in his name. The said allotment was illegal. It is also contended that the learned Additional Commissioner also committed the same error and presumed the disputed land as Patta land upheld the trial Courts order. It is also stated that during the pendency of the suit before the trial Court, the disputed land was exchanged with Plot No. 1505/6 are a 3.49 acres from one Anwar Ali by order of S.D.O. and later the disputed land was auctioned in recovery proceedings and was purchased by one Ghanshyam son of Dina Nath and now it stands recorded in his name as bhumidhari. So, therefore, it cannot at this stage be treated and cancelled as Patta land.

(3.) THE brief facts of the case that a report for cancellation of Patta was moved on 13-4-76 on the ground that the revisionist was not eligible for Patta as he was already having 18.45 acres of land in the name of his family. The basis of this report was an entry in the khatauni of 1383-F wherein in Khata No. 392 the name of the revisionist Hindupat son of Hazari was recorded in verg 2 sirdar from 1366-F and 1368-F respectively in relation to Plot No. 1396 are 4.95 acres and Plot No. 1412 area 1.20 acres respectvely. Notice was issued from the Court of Collector Lalitpur under the hand writing of Appeal Ahalmed on 3-7-78. Revisionist Hindupat filed reply of this notice on 29-11-1978 before the trial Court stating briefly that was never allotted this land by the Gaon Sabha. On the contrary he was in possession of the disputed land from before Zamindari Abolition and was recorded as sirdar and he has developed this land already it after title piece and dug a Tubewell also therefore, notice under Section 198(4) of the U.P.Z.A and L.R. Act is not maintainable and the same should be dropped. He stated nothing about the allegation that he was not eligible for allotment of the land. In support of his contentions he submitted extract of khatauni 1366-F 1368-F wherein on Khata No. 435 Plot No. 1396 are 5.90 acres is recorded as Bijnor Kabilkasht and it also contains an order passed by Tehsildar concerned in Suit No. 2542 under Rule 115-C dated 8-9-58 where by 4.95 acres of Plot No. 1396 has been recorded in the name of the revisionist in verg 2 sirdar. Similarly in the Khatauni of 1366-F-1368-F the name of the revisionist has been recorded as sirdar over Plot No. 1412 area 1.20 acres by order of S.D.O. passed in Suit No. 1709 dated 18-9-60.