NETRAPAL Vs. ADDL COLLECTOR ALIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 12.12.1983 passed by the Additional Collector. Aligarh and further for quashing the order dated 9.2.1983 passed by the Tahsildar, Aligarh.

(2.) The brief facts, as stated by the petitioner for the purpose of the present petition are that plot No. 27 measuring 4 bighas 8 biswas 5 biswancis situate in village Balbhandrapur, Pargana Koil, district Aligarh. was leased out to the petitioner by the Gaon Sabha concerned on 15.1.1966 for a period of one year on payment of annual rent of Rs. 30 payable six monthly in two Instalments, it is stated that the petitioner occupied the land on the basis of the aforesaid lease deed and was asami of the gaon sabha. It is further stated that on 18.1.1970, the gaon sabha again granted patta to the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid plot for a period of five years on the same annual rent and the petitioner remains in possession for five years without interference and paid rent. It is again stated that on 20.1.1975 again patta was granted for five years on the same terms and conditions and the period expired on 20-1.1975. Thereafter, the respondent again granted patta on 3.2.1977 after getting permission from the Sub-Divisional Officer and the actual rent was enhanced from Rs. 30 to Rs, 48.50 palse but there was no period mentioned in that lease deed and on 15.5.1977, the lease was verified by the Supervisor Qanoongo and the name of the petitioner was mutated in revenue record by order of the Supervisor Qanoongo dated 15.5.1977 on the basis of the lease dated 3.2.1977, It is further stated that prior to 1384 Fasli, the petitioner was recorded as class IV tenant and subsequently by order dated 15.5.1977 passed by Supervisor Qanoongo on the back of the lease deed dated 3,2.1977 the petitioner was recorded as class III tenant, i.e., asami in the revenue record and since then the petitioner is in continuous possession of the land in question. But due to election rivalry, proceeding under Section 122B of U. 'P. Zamindarl Abolition and Land Reforms Act was started against the petitioner on the report of the village Pradhan.

(3.) The petitioner contested the notice issued to him and claimed asami right and challenged the proceeding under Section 122B being without Jurisdiction, The respondent No. 2 on 9.2.1983 passed an order of ejectment and awarded an amount of Rs. 133.62 paise as damages for use and occupation of the land in dispute. It has been held by the respondent No. 2 that the period of lease has held by the respondent No. 2 that the period of lease has expired in the year 1977 and thereafter the possession of the petitioner was unauthorised from 1384 Fasli to 1389 Fasli.