RAM LAL Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONOSLIDATION HAMIRPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question referred to for our consideration in this case is whether U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act can apply to the land falling within Municipality or Town Area. Referring order has mentioned a decision of a learned single Judge in the case of Harbans Bahadur v. State, 1980 AWC 252 where it was held that the Consolidation of Holdings Act applies only to that area to which UP ZA and LR Act has been extended and it cannot be applied to any other area. THE referring order has further mentioned that the learned single Judge was aware that the State of U. P. has applied the provisions of Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Consolidation Act) to such land in several districts, and the quashing of notification under section 5 (2) of the Consolidation Act in regard to such land would mean affecting rights of a large number of persons whose claims have been decided by the Consolidation authorities. THE referring order further points out that the aforesaid decision in the case of Harbans Bahadur v. State (Supra) has not made any reference to the provisions of Section 64 of the U. P. Urban Areas Zamindari Abolition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Urban Area Act) and also to the provisions of Section 1 (2) (Second proviso) of the UP ZA & LR Act, hereinafter referred to as the Zamindari Act.

(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties, Dr. R. Dwivedi and Shri N. B. Nigam. Dr. Dwivedi argued that the Consolidation Act applied also to agricultural land situate within the boundaries of a Municipality, Cantonment, Town area and Notified Area. Any land to which the provisions of Chapter VIII and X of the Zamindari Act had application would be land to which the Consolidation Act also applied. He referred to the provisions of Section 64 of Urban Area Act and Section 1 (2) (second proviso) of the Zamindari Act in support of his above contention. Mr. N. B. Nigam, learned counsel for the respondents urged that Consolidation Act had no application in urban areas like Municipality, Cantonment, Town Area or a notified area for the reason that the provisions of the Zamindari Act had no application to these areas. The Consolidation Act would only apply where the Zamindari Act applied. He further urged that the decision in Harbans Bahadur case (Supra) correctly laid down the law and the provisions of Section 64 of the Urban Area Act or Section 1 (2) (second proviso) of the Zamindari Act did not affect the law laid down in the above decision.

(3.) UNDER this definition Zamindari Act would apply to the whole of Uttar Pradesh except those areas, which on the 7th day of July, 1949, were included in a Municipality or a notified area, Town Area or a Cantonment. It is, therefore, apparent that the Zamindari Act has no application on the land included in any area under a Municipality, Notified Area, Town Area or a Cantonment.