VIJENDRA SINGH Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Perused the compliance report of Shri R.D. Singh Duhan, Deputy Collector, Tehsil Sadar District Muzaffar Nagar which has been filed by Shri Sanjay Goswami, learned standing Counsel. The Court records its great appreciation of the Deputy Collector for taking pains in complying with the earlier order of this Court and getting the ponds vacated. If other officers also show similar diligence then position will improve a lot.

(2.) Notices were sent to other contesting respondents. Respondent Nos. 25 and 34 have appeared through Shri Manoj Mishra, learned Counsel. Shri R.K. Yadav has appeared for respondents 38, 40,42, 44 and 45. He states that some of the respondents represented by him were allotted patta from the land comprised in plot Nos. 281 and 312. Patta of the said land was not cancelled even by Deputy Collector through his order dated 4.6.1999. Actually, pond is situate on plot Nos. 520 and 335. Om Pal, Jyoti and Rati Ram were allotted land from plot Nos. 281M and 312. They are respondents 22, 23 and 42 respectively in the instant writ petition. Their pattas have not been cancelled. These respondents unnecessarily filed revision.

(3.) In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Hinch Lal Tiwari Vs. Kamla Devi, 2001 (92) RD 689 (SC) no person can be allotted pond.