Bhura vs B.O.R. and Others

Rajesh Balia, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the appellant.

The petitioner is aggrieved with the orders passed by Up-Tehsildar dated 15.6.1996, Addl. Collector, Rajsamad dated 31.7.1996, Revenue Appellate Authority dated 28.1.1998 and the Board of Revenue dated 24.4.1988 by the petitioner has been held to be a habitual trespasser and he has been ordered to be evicted from the land which is a part of Gochar land and on which he has committed trespass even after his earlier eviction.

The petitioner has pleaded for regularisation on the basis of his long possession and has relied on Circular Issued by the Govt. dated 2nd Feb., 1983 to regularize the long possession even in case of Gochar land provided a person is in possession since before 1970. In the proceedings u/s 91, the petitioner has failed to avail the opportunity offer to him for producing any evidence in support of his long possession but he neither availed this opportunity on the date fixed nor was he present on the date when the order of eviction was announced on 15.6.1996. The appellate Court as well as revisional Court has taken into consideration the photo copies of the documents filed by him in appeal and found that at best as per the documents produced by the petitioner himself his possession can be earliest dated back to 1977-1978 and not earlier thereto, therefore, he is neither entitled to regularisation under the rules nor under the circular on which he places reliance. Moreover, regularisation is not a matter of right for which a mandamus can be issued. Taking this into consideration, the learned Single Judge has not entertained the petition and has dismissed it. We are in agreement. Appeal is dismissed in limine.