R.L. Gulati, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) THE Petitioner owns some agricultural land in village Kamhardih, Teh. Robertsganj, Distt. Mirzapur. In the year 1944 -45 he took two loans of Rs. 2,300/ - and Rs. 2,700/ - under the Land Improvement Act, 1883. He was not able to repay the debt in full. In the year 1953 the Collector, Mirzapur, the fourth Respondent, attached the Petitioner's land Under Section 289 of the UP ZA and LR Act for the recovery of the unpaid loan. Thereafter the Petitioner moved several applications. The Land Reforms Commr., the third Respondent, by his order dated 8 -9 -1953 remitted a sum of Rs. 2,272/ - which was the balance of the first loan. Similarly by his order dated 4 -1 -1966 he remitted a further sum of Rs. 1,890/ - which was the unpaid balance out of the second loan. The Petitioner alleges that inspite of the fact that the unpaid balance of the loans had been remitted his land was not released from attachment. It is further alleged that the land revenue in respect of the land was demanded from the Petitioner for the period the land was under attachment. In 1960, the Tehsildar Robertsganj, the first Respondent, issued against the Petitioner a warrant of arrest for the recovery of the arrears of land revenue. The Petitioner moved two applications contending that he was not liable to pay the land revenue as the land in dispute had all along remained under attachment and in the custody of the Collector, Mirzapur. The Collector, it is alleged, reattached the land on 30 -9 -1961 for the recovery of the arrears of land revenue. The Petitioner thereafter appears to have made several attempts to have his land restored, but he did not succeed. Eventually he received a notice on 16 -12 -1969 from the SDO, Robertsganj, Mirzapur, the sixth Respondent, demanding a sum of Rs. 2,711 -22. The Petitioner has filed this petition praying for the quashing of this notice. The Petitioner has in para. 33 of the petition alleged that the sum of Rs. 2,711 -22 which is being demanded from him by the notice dated 16 -12 -1969, as land revenue in respect of the land in dispute is for the period the land remained attached. This assertion of the Petitioner has not been controverted in the counter -affidavit. It is thus the admitted case of the parties that the amount sought to be realised from the Petitioner is the land revenue for the period the land was under attachment.
(3.) THE Petitioner contends that Under Section 289 of the UP ZA and LR Act under which the attachment has been made, no land revenue is payable for the period the land remains under attachment. This contention of the Petitioner appears to be correct. Section 289 of the UP ZA and LR Act has been deleted by U.P. Act No. XII of 1965, but it was in force at the material time. That provision reads: 289 (1) Attachment of village for arrears of land revenue: At any time after an arrear of land revenue has accrued, the Collector may attach the village or any area therein in respect of which the arrear is due and place it under his own management or that of an agent appointed by him for that purpose for such period as he may consider necessary: Provided that the period for which any village or any area therein may be so attached, shall not exceed three years from the commencement of the agricultural year next following the date of attachment and the attachment shall be cancelled if the arrears are sooner liquidated. (2) Upon the expiry of the period of attachment, the village shall be restored free of any claim on the part of the Government for any arrear of land revenue due in respect thereof.;