- (1.) HEARD Sri S.N. Rai, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Arvind Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ram Seweak Prajapati, learned standing counsel for the State. None appears for the respondent No.3.
(2.) ON 14.08.2014, the following order was passed in this case: "Heard Shri S.N.Rai, Advocate holding brief of Shri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Ram Sewak Prajapati, learned standing counsel for the State. None appears for the respondent no.3. By means of this writ petition the petitioners have challenged the order dated 8.2.2001 passed by the Sub -divisional Officer/Collector, Mirzapur, whereby the land in question is said to have been allotted to respondent no.3 and his name has been directed to be entered in the revenue record as bhumidhar with non transferable right. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the land in question was recorded in the revenue record for being utilised for public purposes such as playground, Panchayat Bhawan and Primary School etc. and, therefore, the same could not have been allotted to the respondent no.3. The khasra annexed as part of Annexure -3 to the writ petition at page 13 reveals that in pursuance of some orders dated 28.2.2000 the land in question was ordered to be recorded as playground in the revenue record with a further order that no patta in respect of the same could be given. This order is dated 13.6.2000. There is a khatauni annexed as part of Annexure -3 at page 14, wherein also the order dated 13.6.2000 is endorsed in column 21 to the same effect. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that once the aforesaid land was earmarked for the said purpose, it was not open for the Sub -divisional Officer/Collector, Mirzapur to allot the same to the respondent no.3, by a subsequent order dated 8.2.2001. A perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents no.1 and 2 reveals that in paragraph 6 thereof it has been submitted that then "SDO on the report of the Pradhan of Gaon Sabha, Khomer Maina, Lalganj, district Mirzapur and the Regional Revenue Inspector as well as Lekhpal dated 22.2.2000, an order dated 28.2.2001 was passed by which the entire area was reserved for playground, but the order dated 28.2.2001 was obtained concealing the material facts whereas the name of the respondent no.3 was recorded by order dated 8.2.2001 over plot no.53 of an area 1 bigha." The aforesaid averments in the counter affidavit sworn by Shri J.L.Saroj, the then Tehsildar, Lalganj, Mirzapur prima facie appears to be contrary to the record filed by the petitioner as part of Annexure -3 to the writ petition. The date 28.2.2001 is contrary to the date mentioned in Annexure -3, i.e., 28.2.2000. If the order was passed on 28.2.2000 then it was prior to the passing of the impugned order dated 8.2.2001 and the averments in paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit referred above would be incorrect. If the facts as mentioned in paragraph 5 of the writ petition and documents contained in Annexure -3 to the writ petition are correct, then, prima facie, Shri J.L.Saroj has tried to mislead the Court by submitting a false affidavit. In view of the above, it is necessary to ascertain as to whether the order recorded in column 21 of the Khasra and Khatauni, annexed as Annexure -3 to the writ petition, was passed on 28.2.2000 or 28.2.2001. Let Sub -divisional Magistrate, Lalganj, Mirzapur appear before this Court on 25.8.2014 along with relevant records to assist the Court in this regard. Learned Standing Counsel Shri Ram Sewak Prajapati shall also inform as to whether Shri J.L. Saroj who had filed the counter affidavit dated 30.3.2006 is still in service and if so, shall inform his place of present posting and designation by the next date. He shall also communicate this order to the Sub -divisional Magistrate, Lalganj, Mirzapur within 48 hours for information and ensuring compliance. List this case on 25.8.2014. Interim order, if any, shall continue till the next date of listing. "
(3.) TODAY , Sri Diwakar Singh, S.D.M. Lalganj, District Mirzapur is present with the relevant records pertaining to the order dated 28.02.2000 and 08.02.2001. Sri Diwakar Singh, learned S.D.M., on the basis of the original revenue records, informed, that the order dated 28.02.2000 passed by the S.D.M., could not be recorded in the khatauni, on account of which the subsequent order dated 08.02.2001 came to be passed in ignorance of the aforesaid order. He admits that the subsequent order is not sustainable in view of the earlier order. Had the earlier order been in the knowledge of the S.D.M., the subsequent order would not have been passed. The original record reveals that the relevant order by which the S.D.M. took a decision for entering the plot No.53, measuring 2 bighas 14 biswas and 12 biswansis as play -ground and for not giving patta in respect thereof, is in fact dated 28.02.2000 and not 08.02.2001. Apparently, in view of the aforesaid order of the S.D.M., the subsequent order dated 08.02.2001 for granting patta in respect of the same land in favour of the respondent No.3 could not have been passed but the same was passed only for the reason that the earlier order was not recorded in the khatauni and therefore, it could not be noticed. In the circumstances, the impugned order dated 08.02.2001 is quashed.;