Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3490 of 2010 Petitioner :- Nagar Palika Parishad Anoopshahr Thru. Exe. Officer Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Rev. Lko. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- A.K. Srivastava Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.
The allegation in this writ petition is that the land in dispute is a Kabristan.
One Mohd. Sharif, respondent no.4 moved an application before the Up Zila
Adhikari, Anoopshahr on 30.12.2008 under Section 33/39 of the Land
Revenue Act alleging that Mirza Khalid Beg and Mirza Zafar Beg, who are
close relatives of D.G.C. (Civil) with the collusion of the officers got the
name of Muslim Welfare Society wrongly entered and as Managers are
selling the said land, though they have no right.
On the said application, an order was passed by the Up Zila Adhikari,
Anoopshahr on 1.1.2009 directing the Tehsildar to submit a report after
enquiry. The said order was challenged by Muslim Kabristan through Sri
Mubarik Hussain as General Secretary, Muslim Welfare Society Anoopshahr,
Bulandshahr by filing revision no.53/08-09 before the Aayukt. The Upper
Aayukt, respondent no.2 by the impugned order dated 29.10.2009 has allowed
the revision and set aside the order dated 1.1.2009.
The impugned order passed by Upper Aayukt only set asides the order of the
Up Zila Adhikari dated 1.1.2009 by which the Tehsildar was called upon to
submit a report on the application moved under Section 33/39 of the Land
Revenue Act. The Upper Aayukt has not passed any order rejecting the
aforesaid application. Accordingly, even though the order dated 1.1.2009 has
been set aside, the aforesaid application is required to be considered de novo
by the Up Zila Adhikari.
In view of the above situation, as the application is to be considered de novo
coupled with the fact that the said application was not an application of the
petitioner, the petitioner suffers no personal injury by the order impugned.
Accordingly, I am of the opinion that the writ petition is misconceived and
liable to be dismissed.
However, the petitioner may take appropriate legal proceedings as may be
permissible to it under law, if any of its rights are affected or likely to be
affected.
The writ petition is dismissed with the above observation.
Order Date :- 27.1.2010
BK