SATVIR Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for Respondents 1, 2, 3 and 4 and Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, the learned counsel representing Respondent 5-Land Management Committee.

(2.) Record shows that the dispute relates to Survey Plot No. 493 area 1.0250 hectares situate in village Sultanpur, Pargana and Tehsil Dadri, district Gautam Budh Nagar. The Halka Lekhpal submitted a report (RC Form-19) alleging therein that petitioner is in illegal possession and occupation over an area of 0.0200 hectares of Survey Plot No. 493 area 1.0250 hectares. Upon submission of aforementioned report, proceedings under Sec. 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 were initiated against the petitioner. Accordingly, Case No. 6070 of 2023 (Land Management Committee v. Satvir) came to be registered in the Court of Respondent 4, Tehsildar (Judicial)/Assistant Collector, Tehsil Dadari, District-Gautam Budh Nagar. Notice (RC From-20) was issued to the petitioner asking him to show cause as to why an order of eviction be not passed against the petitioner and further why damages be not imposed for illegally occupying Gaon Sabha land. In response to the aforesaid notice, petitioner duly appeared in aforementioned case before the respondent No. 4 and filed his objections dtd. 10/3/2023. Petitioner denied the report submitted by Halka Lekhapl and alleged that he is not in possession and occupation over the land in dispute. Since the petitioner had denied his possession over the land in dispute, consequently a spot inspection was ordered to be conducted. A revenue team was constituted to conduct spot inspection. The revenue team so constituted, conducted the spot inspection in the presence of the villagers and submitted its report dtd. 18/3/2023. As per said report, the petitioner was found to be in illegal possession and occupation over an area of 0.0200 hectares of the land in dispute i.e. Survey Plot No. 493 area 1.0250 hectares. Respondent 4, Tehsildar (Judicial)/Assistant Collector, Tehsil Dadari, District-Gautam Budh Nagar upon consideration of the material on record came to the conclusion that petitioner has failed to establish his right, title and interest over the land in dispute. Consequently, petitioner is in illegal possession and occupation of Gaon Sabha land to the extent of 0.0200 hectares. Accordingly, respondent No. 4 came to the conclusion that petitioner is liable to be evicted from the land in dispute. Respondent No. 4 further held that petitioner is also liable to pay damages to the tune of Rs.24,00,000.00(twenty four lacs) and execution cost of Rs.4,200.00. It thus passed the order dtd. 24/3/2023, whereby not only eviction of petitioner from the land in dispute was directed but also damages as mentioned above were also imposed against the petitioner.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved by above order dtd. 24/3/2023, petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority i.e. respondent No. 2-Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Gautam Budh Nagar which was registered as Appeal No. 520 of 2023 (Vinod v. NOIDA Industrial Development Authority), under Sec. 67(5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. As per the memo of appeal, number of grounds were raised in challenge to the order dtd. 24/3/2023. However, none of the grounds raised in the memo of appeal or the submissions urged on behalf of the petitioner in support of the appeal found favour with the appellate authority. The respondent No. 2 accordingly dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner by passing an order of affirmance dtd. 27/9/2023.