SOBAN Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE U P ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JANARDAN Sahai, J. The present writ petition arises out of proceedings under Section 15-A of the U. P. Bhoodan Yagna Act. The respondents No. 3 to 8 filed an application before the Collector, Sonbhadra for cancellation of the Patta if any granted by the Bhoodan Yagna Committee in favour of the petitioners in respect of the land in dispute. The case of the respondents was that the land in dispute belonged to their ancestors and that it never vested in the Bhoodan Yagna Committee nor was the land ever donated by the respondents' ancestors to the Bhoodan Yagna Committee and that the names of the respondents were entered in the revenue records and there was no order for expunging the entry. The application was contested by the petitioners. Their case was that the land in dispute belonged to one Raja Anand Brahm Shah, who donated the said land to the Bhoodan Yagna Committee which in turn allotted the land to the petitioners. In support of their case the respondents relied upon an extract of the register of Bhoodan Yagna Committee in which the date of donation of the land by Raja Anand Brahm Shah is shown as 30-6- 1952. It appears that another application for cancellation of certain Pattas said to have been given by the Gaon Sabha in favour of other persons was also filed by one Shiv Charan. The case set up by Shiv Charan was that the land never vested in the Gaon Sabha and consequently the Gaon Sabha could not allot the land. Both the cases were decided by a common order. The finding arrived at by the Additional Collector was that the land in dispute never vested in the Gaon Sabha/bhoodan Yagna Committee and the Pattas were void. There is a recital in the order of the Additional Collector, Sonbhadra, dated 22-9- 92 that in the Khatauni of 1365-F the land in dispute is entered in the complainant. According to the Counsel for the petitioners this recital refers to the complainant Shiv Charan and not to the contesting respondents. Sri S. C. Verma Counsel for the respondents however submits that the said observation pertains to the complainant of the present case, namely the ancestors of the contesting respondents. The order of the Additional Collector was challenged by the petitioners in revision, which was dismissed by the Board of Revenue by its order dated 25-4-1995 on the ground that the order passed under Section 15-A of the Bhoodan Yagna Act was final and no revision against that order is maintainable. Aggrieved the petitioners have filed the present petition.

(2.) I have heard Sri C. K. Rai Counsel for the petitioners and Sri S. C. Verma Counsel for the respondents.

(3.) THE question which is involved in this case is about the title of the donor and that of the Bhudan Yagna Committee and as to whether there was at all a grant in favour of the petitioners. THEse questions can be examined by a revenue Court or by consolidation Court. Invalidity of the allotment on any other ground such as fraud or misrepresentation in obtaining the allotment under Section 14 has not been alleged which are questions which fall within the scope of an enquiry under Section 15-A of the Act. THE matter cannot therefore, be sent back to the Collector for enquiry under Section 15-A. THE issue whether there is or is not any allotment in favour of the petitioners and whether the donor had any title over the land and whether the land vested in the Bhoodan Yagna Committee can be adjudicated by the revenue or consolidation Courts. As the Counsel for the parties are on common ground that notification under Section 4, sub-section (2) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act has been issued, a suit for declaration will not be maintainable in the revenue Court. THE remedy of the parties is to file objections under Section 9 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act in case a notification under Section 4 (2) has been issued.