RIKHI SINGH Vs. ADDL. COMMISSIONER (JUDICIAL) SAHARANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the revisional court's order dated 17.10.2000 passed by the Commissioner under Section 333 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. A sale deed was executed by Buddhan in favour of the petitioner on 12.09.1991 in respect of a certain land. There was a categorical recital in the sale deed that the vendor did not belong to Scheduled Caste. More than six years after registration of the sale deed, a stranger namely Dhumman, claiming himself to be a member of the Land Management Committee of the concerned village, filed a complaint, whereupon the Sub-Divisional Magistrate issued a notice under Section 167 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act to the petitioner on 29.10.1997. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed a revision under Section 333 challenging the notice dated 20.10.1997 issued by the S.D.M. firstly on the ground that the S.D.M. did not have jurisdiction to issue such notice, secondly on the ground that the notice was barred by limitation prescribed vide Appendix-III, Serial No.20. The limitation prescribed was six years from the date of illegal transfer.

(3.) The revisional court accepted the contention of the petitioner to the extent that the S.D.M. did not have jurisdiction to issue notice, however, after recording his finding in this regard, he remanded the matter back for consideration by the Collector under Section 167 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, without deciding the second objection regarding the bar of limitation.