B.L.Yadav - (1.) WHETHER petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of sub-section (4) of section 122-B of the UP ZA LR Act 1950 (for short the Act) is the short questions for consideration in this petition.
(2.) IN proceedings under section 122-B of the Act 9 notice 49 Ka (Annexure II to the petition) was served on vishwanath the petitioner for ejectment and damages, as he has occupied the land vested in the Gaon Sabha otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of the Act. In reply to that notice 49 Ka the petitioner filed objection stating that he being a lessee since 24-10-82 to 25-10-1992 is neither liable for ejectment nor payment of damages. He is a Bhumidhar in view of the provisions of section 122-B (4-F) of the Act being a member of the Scheduled Caste has occupied the Hand from before 1985. The lease pertaining to land in dispute was granted in the name of petitioner for a period of 10 years i.e. with effect from 24-12-82 to 25-10-92 (Annexure I to the petition). That period has not expired. After considering the evidence on record, learned Tehsildar discharged the notice on 28-2-92 against which Gaon Sabha preferred a revision which has been allowed by the impugned order dated 8-9-92 and the petitioner has been directed to be ejected after 25-10-92, the date of expiry of the period of lease and to pay damages
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner urged that the petitioner is entitled to protection under section 122-B (4-F) of the Act, hence he is not liable to ejectment and the impugned order was manifestly erroneous. For taking the benefit of section 122-B (4-F) of the Act, it must be the case of the petitioner that he occupied the land from before June 1985, but petitioner has been granted lease (Annexure I). Since 24-10-82 to 25- 10-1992. The lease will expire on 25-10-92. Sub-section (4-F) of section 122-B has to be read along with section 122-B as the cardinal rule of interpretation is that not only every part of the statute has to be read together, but every part of the same section has also to be read together. Normally, the courts lean against any construction which tends to reduce the statute to a fulity.;