Kamal Narain Singh, J. - (1.) This is a petition u/Art. 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the orders passed by the Board of Revenue dated 14th October, 1969 and the order of the Addl. Commr., Faizabad Division dated 14th February, 1966. The petitioners made an application before the SDO for the exchange of their land with that of the Gaon Sabha. The SDO after making an enquiry and obtaining the report of Tahsildar allowed the exchange. The Gaon Sabha later on repudiated its consent for the exchange, it filed an appeal before the Addl. Commr. which was allowed and the order of exchange was set aside. On an appeal by the petitioners the Board of Revenue upheld the order of the Addl. Commr. and dismissed the petitioner's application for the exchange of land. The main question involved in the present case is whether the Gaon Sabha was entitled under the law to exchange the land which had been earmarked for a public purpose by the Consolidation authorities under the UP Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. It is admitted by the parties that the plots Nos. 161 and 185 situated in village Pirauli had been ear -marked by the Consolidation Authorities for the purposes of pasture land, so that the residents of the locality could graze their catties on that land. The petitioners made an application before the SDO for the exchange of the said plots with their agricultural plot No. 394. According to them their plot No. 394 was allotted to them under the Consolidation (sic) which was situate at a considerable distance from their house and the plots Nos. 161 and 185 belonging to the Gaon Sabha were situated quite near to their house. The area and the rental value of their plot was not lower to that of the said plots of Gaon Sabha. The Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha gave his consent for the exchange. The SDO obtained report from Tahsildar and granted permission for the exchange. On appeal by the Gaon Sabha, the Addl. Commr. as well as the Board of Revenue held that the Gaon Sabha had no authority to exchange the plots which had been set out for pasture land by the Consolidation Authorities.
(2.) U/S. 161 of the UP ZA and LR Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), a Bhumidhar or a Sirdar is authorised to exchange land with any other Bhumidhar or Sirdar or with Gaon Sabha or local authority, if such land as vested in it u/S. 117 of the Act. According to the proviso to Cl. (b) of sub -S. (1) of S. 161, such exchange cannot be made except with the permission of an Asstt. Collector who is empowered to refuse permission, if the difference between the rental value of the land given in exchange and of the land received in exchange calculated at hereditary rates, is more than ten per cent of the lower rental value. A Gaon Sabha is, therefore, authorised to exchange its land with any Bhumidhar or sirdar provided the permission for such exchange is granted by the Asstt. Collector and there is no difference of rental value to the extent of more than ten per cent. In the present case, it is admitted that there was no difference of more than ten per cent in the rental value. There is, however, a controversy between the parties as to whether the Asstt. Collector had granted permission to the Gaon Sabha for the exchange of the plots. The Addl. Commr. and the Board of Revenue, both have held that there was no such permission. Learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously urged that the SDO who was an Asstt. Collector by his order dated 19th June, 1965 had granted the permission. In my opinion, it is not necessary to decide this controversy because even if it be assumed that permission as contemplated by the proviso to cl. (b) of sub -S. (1) of S. 161 was given by the Asstt. Collector, the petitioner cannot succeed.
(3.) The UP Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 provides that when scheme of Consolidation in a village is finalised, land shall be ear -marked for public purpose. U/S. 8A of the UP Consolidation of Holdings Act, statement of principles is required to contain details of the areas earmarked for extension of abadi site for Harijans and landless persons in the unit, and for such other public purposes as may be prescribed. U/R. 24 -A of the UP Consolidation of Holdings Rules, framed u/S. 54 of the Act, public purposes for which the area should be earmarked are prescribed. According to this rule in addition to the reservation of land for extension of Abadi including the areas for abadi sites for Harijans and landless persons, land may be ear -marked according to the local requirements for the public purposes, viz: manure pits, roads, pasture land, thrashing floor, play grounds, primary and other schools, hospitals, panchayatghars, cremation and graveyards, water channels etc. U/S. 19 of the Act, tenure holders are required to contribute land from their holdings towards the land which is earmarked for a public purpose as required by the Act and the Rules. The land so set out by the consolidation authorities for the public purposes mentioned in the Act and the Rules, vests in the Gaon Sabha u/S. 29 -C of the Act and such land cannot be utilised for any other purpose.;