Loading...

(Smt.) Suhagwati Wife Of Sri Ram … vs State Of U.P. Through Secretary, … on 21 February, 2008

Allahabad High Court
(Smt.) Suhagwati Wife Of Sri Ram … vs State Of U.P. Through Secretary, … on 21 February, 2008
Author: A Bhushan
Bench: A Bhushan

JUDGMENT

Ashok Bhushan, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel representing the respondents No. 1 and 2.

2. By this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the illegal allotment of agricultural land by the Land Management Committee dated 3.11 2007.

3. Learned standing counsel submits that remedy of the petitioners is to file an application, seeking cancellation of the lease under Section 198 (4) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that village is under consolidation hence, the remedy of Section 198 (4) cannot be invoked.

4. I have considered the submissions of counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

5. The question raised in the present writ petition is as to whether, the petitioners have remedy under Section 198 (4) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, seeking cancellation of the lease or the said remedy cannot be invoked in view of the fact that notification under Section 4(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act has already been issued.

6. Section 198 (4) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 provides for cancellation of agricultural lease granted under Sections 195 and 197. Section 198 (4) of the is to the following effect:

198 (4) The Collector may of his own motion and shall on the application of any person aggrieved by an allotment of land inquire in the manner prescribed into such allotment and if he is satisfied that the allotment is irregular, he may cancel the allotment and the lease, if any.

7. The effect of notification under Section 4(2) is provided under Section 5 (2) of the of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act which is as follows:

5(2) Upon the said publication of the notification under Sub-section (2) of Section 4 the following further consequences shall ensure in the area to which the notification relates, namely:

(a) every proceeding for the correction of records and every suit and proceeding in respect of declaration of rights or interest in any land lying in the area, or for declaration or adjudication of any other right in regard to which proceedings can or ought to be taken under this Act, pending before any court or authority whether of the first instance or of appeal, reference or revision, shall, on an order being passed in that behalf by the court or authority before whom such suit or proceeding is pending stand abated:

Provided that no such order shall be passed without giving to the parties notice by post or in any other manner and after giving them an opportunity of being heard:

Provided further that on the issue of a notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 6 in respect of the said area or part thereof, every such order in relation to the land lying in such area or part, as the case may be, shall stand vacated;

(b) such abatement shall be without prejudice to the rights of the persons affected to agitate the right or interest in dispute in the said suits or proceedings before the appropriate consolidation authorities under and in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder.

8. The grant of lease under Sections 195 and 197 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 is special provision provided under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. Section 198 (4) also contains a provision for cancellation of such lease which power vests in the Collector by virtue of Section 198. The Collector can cancel the lease, if he is satisfied that allotment is irregular. Section 5 (2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act contemplates abatement of proceedings regarding the correction of records and every suit and proceeding in respect of declaration of rights or interest in any land lying in the area, or for declaration or adjudication of any other right in regard to which proceedings can or ought to be taken under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. The proceedings for cancellation of lease are not the proceedings of correction of records. They can also not be treated as suit or proceeding in respect of declaration of rights or interest in any land. The petitioners, who pray for cancellation of lease, do not claim declaration of their rights or interest in the land nor the proceedings under Section 198 (4) can be treated to be proceedings taken under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.

9. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Similesh Kumar v. Gaon Sabha Uskar Ghazipur and Ors. reported in 1977 RD 408, held that consolidation authorities have no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon validity of lease during currency of the notification under Section 4(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. It is useful to quote following observations of the Full Bench in this context:

The position, however, in a proceeding under Section 198 of the Act is altogether different. The Collector is not to adjudge the validity or legality of an allotment on the basis of possession, but on the finding whether such an allotment had taken place in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules. As a matter of fact, the question of possession is foreign to the controversy involved under Section 198 of the Act. In these proceedings, all that one can show is to justify the allotment. Accordingly, the proceedings under Section 198 of the Act cannot be kept at par with these summary proceedings, a reference of which has been made above. Simply because at one time there was a provision of a suit under Sub-section (4) of Section 198, to our mind, it does not materially effect the position. It, therefore, appears to us that the remedy provided by Section 198 is exhaustive and exclusive, and that the question relating to the validity of a lease cannot be gone into by the consolidation authorities.

10. Following the law laid down by the Full Bench, it is held that proceedings under Section 198 (4) U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 shall neither abate nor there is any inhibition in initiating the proceedings during currency of the notification under Section 4 (2). Thus, the remedy of the petitioners is very much there under Section 198 (4) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 In view of the above, the reliefs claimed in the present writ petition cannot be granted to the petitioners. The petitioners may avail their remedy under Section 198 (4). The writ petition is dismissed.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information