Decided on June 11,2013

State Of U P Through D M Chamoli Respondents


B.S.VERMA, J. - (1.) BY means of this petition the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the judgment and order dated 18 -7 -1995, passed by Prescribed Authority Chamoli in Case No. 13 of 1994 State vs. Gabbar Singh and the order dated 22 -11 -1996 passed by District Judge Chamoli in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 18/1995 Gabbar Singh Vs. State Annexure Nos. 2 and 3 respectively to the writ petition.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case giving rise to this writ petition are that on the basis of report submitted by Patwari Chamoli proceedings under Section 4/5 of U.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act 1972 were initiated against the petitioner before Prescribed Authority Chamoli. Notice U/S 4 of the Act was issued to the petitioner. In reply the petitioner has alleged that the land in question was given to him on lease by the State and he has raised construction over the said land. The parties also adduced evidence before the Prescribed Authority. The learned Prescribed Authority vide judgment dated 18 -7 -1995 passed eviction order against the petitioner from three Muthis land of Khasra No.2 of Village Bhu -talla, Tehsil and District Chamoli. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner preferred appeal which was dismissed by the District Judge vide order dated 22 -11 -1996. Aggrieved by the impugned orders the petitioner has preferred this writ petition and has alleged that the Deputy Commissioner Chamoli has granted the lease of four Muthis to the petitioner in Khasra No.2 of the aforesaid village vide order No. 301/80 -81 in the year 1981 and the petitioner has constructed two houses over the said leased land. It is further pleaded that the Patwari has submitted wrong map and the challani report has been submitted in respect of the same land of which the petitioner has been granted lease. It is further alleged that the Patwari with the collision of Mansa Ram and Badri Prasad submitted the challani report of the same land which was granted to him.
(3.) COUNTER affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State. In the counter affidavit it has been pleaded that the petitioner has not constructed the house on the land sanctioned to him on lease but he has constructed the house on three Muthis excess land of the State and the eviction order has rightly been passed against him. Rejoinder affidavit has also been filed by the petitioner and alleged that the construction has been made by the petitioner on the leased land and no encroachment has been made on the some other Government land. It is further alleged that the Patwari has submitted wrong challani report with collusion of some village people and the learned Prescribed Authority without verifying the true record has simply relied on the challani report and on the basis of wrong report and map the petitioner cannot be evicted from the house raised by him on the land granted to him on lease.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.