V.D. Bhargava, J. - (1.) This is a petition u/Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging an order passed by the Compensation Officer of Balrampur. There is an Asthan of Devi Patan Temple, which is a religious and charitable institution and is managed through a Sarbarakar. At the time when the present writ petition was filed Mahant Bhambool Nath Ji was the Sarbarakar and this petition has been filed by him on behalf of the Asthan. There was a Mela Devi Patan which was being held in the month of April each year in Patan on various plots belonging to the temple. These plots inter alia were Nos. 1044/1, 1044/2, 1049, 236,237, 1045, 1051, 1054, 238 and 1048 and it yielded considerable income. Out of these ten plots plot No. 238 was banjar and plot No. 1048 was being used as a pathway. After the coming into operation of the UP ZA and LR Act these two plots being banjar and pathway vested in the State Government, while the remaining plots remained with the Petitioner. The Petitioner has given various incomes that he received from the year 1350 Fasli to 1359 Fasli and the average income per year was roughly about Rs. 13,073 -7 -7. The Patwari of the village had not entered the incomes of the years previous to 1359 and it was only entered in 1359 Fasli as Rs. 13,000.
(2.) Somewhere in the year 1953 draft compensation rolls were prepared by the Compensation Officer, Balrampur, and Under Sec. 40 a sum of Rs. 1300 was shown as the average income of the plots vested in the State. The final assessment was also made giving Rs. 1300, as compensation. The case of the Petitioner is that he had absolutely no intimation or any notice of these proceedings. He has further said that even his predecessors had also no notice of any of these proceedings. On 10 -1 -56, the Petitioner was paid Rs. 4961 -4 -0 as compensation for three years, i.e. 1359 to 1361 Fasli regarding the two vested plots. Subsequently, in September 1956, the Land Reforms Commissioner UP directed the opposite party No. 1 for having recourse to S. 61(2) of the UP ZA & LR Act & to make reduction in the compensation assessment roll by reducing the annual Sayar income of the Mela from Rs. 1300 to Rs. 325 and a notice was sent on 10 -10 -56, to the Petitioner requiring him to appear on 29th of October for the purpose of explaining to the opposite party what portion of the income of 1359F has been vested in the Gaon Samaj.
(3.) A reply was filed saying that the two plots had vested in the Gaon Samaj and that the income of the Mela was not Rs. 1300 but would be something about Rs. 13000 annually and, therefore, the amount instead of being reduced should be increased. The Compensation Officer came to the conclusion that so far as the reduction is concerned, it would be only an arithmetical error and though the Petitioner may have been entitled to a higher compensation, as that was not an arithmetical or clerical error he is not entitled to correct it. Therefore, this petition has been filed challenging the compensation roll which was fixed without any notice to him and, therefore, was bad in law.;