- (1.) Heard Sri Shashi Nandan, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri S.R. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State and its authorities respondents. Petitioner is Lekhpal, posted at Galand Tehsil Ghoulana, District Panchsheel Nagar (Hapur). He has been suspended through order dated 16.6.2012 which is challenged through this writ petition and is contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition. The allegation against the petitioner is that he gave false report so that names of private person could be entered as Bhoomidhar over gaon sabha land which consisted of pond grave yard etc. and that he filed report of possession on the basis of alleged allotment of 1989 after 22 years even though the name of the alleged allottees was not recorded in the revenue record.
(2.) There is absolutely nothing wrong in the impugned suspension order.
(3.) However, the documents annexed alongwith the writ petition disclose a horrible state of affairs and confirm the view of this Court taken in several cases that Gaon Sabha/State property particularly in districts Gautam Budh Naga, Ghaziabad and Meerut is being looted with active assistance of revenue officers on large scale. In this regard reference may be made to a judgment given by me Dina Nath v. State of U.P., 2009 9 ADJ 735, relevant paragraph of the said authority are quoted below: 10. If the Collector finds that no patta was executed in 1968 and Ram Roop and his family members usurped the property of the Gaon Sabha on the ground that prior to 1969, he was Pradhan, then stern action must be taken/recommended to be taken against the CO. who passed the order on 12.2.1997. Collector may also reopen all such cases in the District in which Gaon Sabha property was mutated in the name of private persons in the similar manner. If patta is executed, then immediately name of the allottee is mutated in the revenue records. Few months delay in getting the names mutated in the revenue records on the basis of pattas is understandable but few decades or few years delay is not at all understandable. 11. The experience of the Court is that during consolidation proceedings, Consolidation Authorities/Officers liberally donate the Gaon Sabha properties to influential/resourceful persons by passing such orders as has been passed in the instant case. 12. Accordingly, all the Collectors of all the Districts in the State are directed to re-open such cases where names of private persons are entered in revenue records on the basis of old pattas or adverse possession over Gaon Sabha land and correct the illegality by taking suo motu action. However, no orders shall be set aside without issuing notice and hearing affected persons. If notice through registered post is not served then it may be served through publication in the newspaper also. If it is found that some Consolidation Officer or S.O.C. or D.D.C. has done similar thing, then the action must be proposed to be taken against him also. 13. Supreme Court has held that fraud vitiates even most solemn proceedings vide Mahboob Sahab v. Syed Ismail and others, 1995 AIR(SC) 1205, United India Insurance Company v. Rajendra Singh, 2000 AIR(SC) 1165and A. V. Papaya Sastryv. Government of A.P. and others, 2007 AIR(SC) 1546.;