UMANATH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Tariq Maqbool Khan for the Gaon Sabha, respondent no.4 as also learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. These three writ petitions arise out of proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 drawn against the respective petitioners for their eviction from land recorded as a rasta in the revenue records.

(2.) The Tehsildar ordered eviction of the petitioners and these orders have been affirmed upon dismissal of the various revisions filed by the petitioners. There are three submissions of counsel for the petitioners in these three writ petition. The first that the Lekhpal in his oral testimony has stated that the rasta is not encroached upon and that it is being freely used by the villagers.

(3.) The third contention is that there are photographs appended to the writ petition, which had also been filed in the proceedings before the Court, which shows that the constructions of the petitioners are situated at distance from the rasta and therefore, the findings returned in the impugned orders are clearly vitiated.