RAM NARAIN Vs. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER MUZAFFARNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioners have sought relief of certiorari for quashing the notice dated 7-6- 1989 purporting to be under Rule 115-C and Rule 115-D of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') contained in Annexure-1 and report of Tehsildar respondent No. 2 dated 24-5-1989 contained in Annexure- 14 and order dated 20-6-1989 passed by respondent No. 1 contained in Annexure-15 respectively to the writ petition and further relief in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to give effect the impugned order and not to make Amal Daramad in revenue records on the basis of impugned orders and not to change the nature of land in dispute, have also been sought for. BY notice dated 7-8-1989 contained in Annexure-1 of the writ petition the Tehsildar/assistant Collector, Tehsil Kairana District Muzaffarnagar has asked the petitioners to vacate the land in question belonging to Gaon Sabha and handover possession of it to the Gaon Sabha and vide report dated 24-5-1989 contained in Annexure-14 of the writ petition submitted by the Tehsildar in the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer, Kairana in case No. 2/88-89, State v. Surajbhan, it appears that recommendation has been made with regard to respondents No. 3 to 45 to give benefit of Section 123 (1) of the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), whose names were mentioned in Form P. A. 24. Vide impugned order dated 20-6-1989 the Sub Divisional Officer has directed that on the basis of possession on 30th June, 1985 the names of the aforesaid persons may be recorded in the revenue records.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are that the plot in dispute namely plot No. 2362 (area 1 bigha 14 biswas) situate in Qasba Shamli, District Muzaffarnagar lies within the limits of Municipality, Shamli. One Khajan Singh claimed himself to be land holder of said plot. However, there was lis between State of Uttar Pradesh and Khajan Singh. A notice purporting to be under Rule 115-C and Rule 115-D of the Rules was issued by the Tehsildar, Kairana way back on 17th June, 1960. By means of the aforesaid notice it was claimed that the land in dispute belonged to the then Gaon Samaj and Khajan Singh was asked to remove his constructions and handover possession of the land to the Gaon Sabha, or else appear in the Court on 18th July, 1960. Khajan Singh gave reply to the said notice claiming that he has been cultivating the land in dispute since 1358 fasli. He claimed that since before 1359 fasli he has become Sirdar of land in dispute. THE Tehsildar, Kairana on being satisfied with the contention raised by late Khajan Singh discharged the notice and directed the file to be consigned. A copy of the notice dated 17th June, 1960 and order dated 31st July, 1960 passed by the Tehsildar are on record as Annexures-1 and 2 to the writ petition. However, yet another notice was issued once again purporting to be under Rule 115-C of the Rules by Sub-Divisional Officer, Kairana some times in March, 1962. This notice related to the land in dispute and contained more or less same facts as were stated in previous notice. A true copy of the said notice is on record as Annexure-3 of the writ petition. Khajan Singh filed objection before Sub-Divisional Officer and vide order dated 30th June, 1962 the Sub-Divisional Officer held that proceeding cannot go since no notification as required by Section 117 of the Act had been published, he, therefore, directed the file to be consigned. A true copy of the order dated 30th June, 1962 is on record as Annexure-4 of the writ petition. THEreafter proceeding for eviction of Khajan Singh had been initiated under Section 4 of the U. P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972 but the said notice was also discharged and possession of Khajan Singh was found as Sirdar. THE State did not prefer any appeal against the aforesaid order.

(3.) IT is further stated in the writ petition that despite the land in dispute falls within Municipal limit of Nagar Palika, Shamli and the provisions of the Act are not applicable to it, the District Authorities which had been nourishing grudge against Late Khajan Singh and consequently against the petitioners were also sympathetic towards members of scheduled castes issued a notice under Section 123 of the Act asking the petitioners to show cause as to why the possession of persons mentioned in the accompanying Form PA-24 be not regularised. A copy of the aforesaid notice is on record as Annexure- 11 of the writ petition. The petitioners gave elaborate reply to the said show cause notice on 4th July, 1988. A copy of the reply of petitioners is on record as Annexure-12 of the writ petition. The petitioner has also challenged the notice in the writ petition earlier filed by them, which was disposed off finally on 3-11- 1988 with a direction to the respondent No. 2 to dispose of the objections filed by the petitioners. The Tehsildar has submitted a report on 24-5-1989 to the effect that land may be settled with respondents No. 3 to 45 under Section 123 of the Act. The report of the Tehsildar is cryptic. He has not considered the legal aspect nor has recorded any finding in this respect. A true copy of the report dated 24-5-1989 is on record as Annexure-14 of the writ petition. On a receipt of the report of Tehsildar, the respondent No. 1 has passed the impugned order dated 20-6-1989 to the effect that mutation of names of contesting respondents No. 3 to 45 may be made in revenue records on the basis of possession prior to 30th June, 1985, a certified copy of the impugned order is on record as Annexure-15 to the writ petition.