RANJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Radhamani Saxena, the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents- 1,2,3,4,5,6 and Mr. Sher Bahadur Singh, the learned counsel representing respondent-7, Gaon Sabha. Perused the record.

(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is in possession over the land in dispute for the last 45 years. The petitioner was initially granted an Asami Patta, on account of which, he came in possession over the land in dispute. On account of long possession of the petitioner, he is liable to be declared as Bhumidhar with transferable rights regarding the land in dispute. He has then referred to the provisions contained under Sec. 76 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. It is further contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that the land over which petitoner is claiming absolute Bhumidhari rights (Transferable Rights) is not a public utility land and therefore, not covered under Sec. 77 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

(3.) Learned Standing Counsel for respondents No. 1 to 6 and Mr. Sher Bahadur Singh, the learned counsel representing respondent-7, Gaon Sabha have opposed the present writ petition by submitting that the land on which absolute Bhumidhari rights are being claimed by the petitioner is a public utility land and therefore, covered under Sec. 77 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. As such, no right can be claimed by the petitioner regarding the land in dispute.