AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Alok Singh, J.
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a writ of Certiorari quashing the order dated 08.08.2013 whereby representation of the petitioner was
rejected.
Petitioner company was Zamindar of the land, in question, prior to enforcement of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R Act, 1951. In the year 1359 Fasli land, in
question, i.e. Khasra No. 893M was cultivated by petitioner and he is still cultivating the land. Assistant Collector, vide order dated 21.12.2010,
changed the category of land, in question, from 4 to 5 (3). Petitioner moved recall application, which is still pending. Thereafter, on 23.09.2011 order of
eviction was passed, which was challenged by the petitioner by way of filing WPMS No. 801 of 2012. This writ petition was disposed of by directing
the Principal Secretary to decide the representation of the petitioner after giving opportunity of hearing. Respondent no. 1, after hearing the petitioner,
rejected the representation of the petitioner vide order dated 08.08.2013. Hence, this writ petition.
Heard Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Hrishek Lakhera, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. M.S. Bisht, Brief Holder for the
State and perused the record.
Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Sr. Advocate for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been cultivating the land prior to enactment of the
U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. As per notification issued in 1977, it was declared that person, who was depositing the revenue, would be declared as
Bhumidhar with transferable rights under Section 132 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1951 and petitioner was paying revenue. Petitioner’s land is
recorded as category 4 land and vide Government Order dated 28.09.2006, person having land in category 4 was given a chance to regularize his land,
after depositing some land revenue. He further submits that neither Gaon Sabha nor State Government has initiated any suit against the petitioner for
eviction or declaration.
Mr. M.S. Bisht, learned Brief Holder submits that as per revenue record, river is shown on the land in question and area / land of river vests in
Government. He further submits that recall application is pending before the Assistant Collector.
Petitioner has neither annexed any document in support of the fact that he was Zamindar of the land, in question nor annexed any revenue receipt
in support of his contention nor khasra of land, in question. All these are disputed questions of facts, which cannot be adjudicated by this Court. Vide
order dated 23.09.2011 petitioner was directed to be evicted. This order is neither challenged before this Court nor its effect and operation was
stayed. Representation of the petitioner was rejected on 8. 08.2013, however, petitioner preferred this writ petition on 22. 12.2004. In the meantime, in
my opinion, so many things would have changed, as eviction order has not been stayed.
In view of the above discussion, I do not find any force in the writ petition. Writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.