LAWS(ALL)-1995-11-72

BALBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On November 27, 1995
BALBIR SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) G. P. Mathur, J. This petition has been filed praying that the letter dated 20. 7. 1994 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition) sent by Divisional Forest Officer Southern Circle, Lakhimpur Khiri be quashed and a writ of mandamus be is sued commanding the respondents not to evict the petitioner from plot Nos. 112, 113, 114, 115, 121 and 122 of Deoria Jaswantpur, Pargana Khutar, Tehsil Puwayau district Shahjahanpur except by initiating proceedings under U. P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972.

(2.) IT is averred in paragraphs 2 and 4 of the writ petition that initially the plots in dispute were declared as surplus but vide order dated 31. 10. 87 passed by Prescribed Authority in Case No. 632 it was reverted back to him and mutation to that effect was made in the Khatauni of 1396-1401 F and as such he is tenure holder of the same. In paras 5 to 7 it is averred that the officers of the Forest Department started harassing the petitioner on the ground that the disputed plots were forest land and then the Sub- Divisional Officer Puwayau, after being satisfied about the genuineness of the petitioner's claim passed an order on 22. 3. 1994 directing the Station Officer of the con cerned Police Station to maintain status quo on the spot and a similar direc tion was again issued on 17. 6. 1994. In paragraphs 11 and 13 it is averred that the respondents (State of U. R and Divisional Forest Officer) are asserting that the plots in dispute have been declared as a reserved forest under Section 20 of the Indian Forest Act. A Chak having been carved out over the disputed plots and he being in possession thereof, on account of applicability of Sec tion 28 of U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, the title of the petitioner can not be disturbed merely on the ground that the land is covered by a notifica tion under Section 20 of the Indian Forest Act.

(3.) FOR the reasons mentioned above, the writ petition iand dismissed summarily. It will however, be open to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for redress of his grievance. Petition dismissed. .