ANEESA KHATOON Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of the present writ petition, petitioner is challenging the order of the Additional Commissioner (J), Moradabad dated 25.8.2008 passed in Revision No. 76/2007-2008, under Section 333 of U.P.Z.A. and L. R. Act, Aneesa Khatoon v. State of U. P. and others, by which the revision filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case giving rise to the present writ petition is that the dispute relates to the land of khasra No. 246 (0.506 hect.) of khata No. 206 situated in village Mohiuddinpur, Pargana Kiratpur, Tehsil Nazibabad, district Bijnor. It is claimed that the said land was allotted to the father of the petitioner, Nazir Ahmad and uncle Chhidda, both sons of Chhajju alias Majhar in the year 1953 (1360 fasli) for agriculture purpose as asami patta. They have been cultivating the same on payment of Rs. 6 to the Revenue Officer. They have been recorded in clause 3 category in khatauni. Chhidda died issuless. It is the case of the petitioner that on the death of Nazir Ahmad, Nazar Hasan, the son of Zazir Ahmad inherited the right over the property and came in possession over it. It is claimed that on the death of Nazir Ahmad, the name of Nazar Hasan was recorded in khatauni in Clause 3 category over the allotted land.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has heridatory right over the land in view of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the Act. The period of five years will not apply inasmuch as the lease was prior to 1975, when the period of five years has been introduced for asami lease. He submitted that in the land in dispute the name of Nazar Ahmad was recorded as asami in 1360 fasli and on the death of Nazar Ahmad, the name of his son Nazar Hasan was recorded as asami, which is clear from the khatauni of the year 1415-1420 fasli, Annexure-12 to the writ petition. He submitted that the lease is not for any specific period, therefore, the provision of Rule 176A of the Rules does not apply and as per the provision of Section 171 (2) (i) being the married sister of Nazar Hasan, the petitioner is entitled to inherit the right of Nazar Hasan over the land in dispute and be treated as asami. He further submitted that Parganadhikari has passed the order without giving the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.