- (1.) THIS special appeal has arisen from an order of the learned Single Judge dated 27 March 2015, dismissing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. In the writ proceedings, the appellant sought to question an administrative order passed by the Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad on an application submitted by the Regional Government Counsel (Revenue), Moradabad Division, Moradabad. The Commissioner directed the Collector to review an order which was passed by him in revision against an original order passed under Section 122 -B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The appellant had called into question the order of the Commissioner on the ground that he had no such statutory power to compel the Collector to review an order passed by him in revision.
(2.) PROCEEDINGS were initiated against the appellant under Section 122 -B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951 on the basis of a report of the Lekhpal dated 12 May 2011, which found that the appellant was in unauthorised occupation of Gram Sabha land. The Assistant Collector in tehsil Amroha, passed an order on 3 April 2013 by which a notice that was issued to the appellant was withdrawn but a direction was issued to the effect that after a fresh demarcation, proceedings could be re -initiated under Section 122 -B of the Act. A revision was filed against the order of the Assistant Collector which was dismissed by the Collector, Amroha on 30 August 2014. Thereafter, it appears from the record that the Regional Government Counsel (Revenue) filed an application before the Commissioner, Moradabad Division on 29 November 2014. On this application, the Commissioner passed an order directing the Collector to review his earlier order dated 30 August 2014. That led to the institution of a writ petition before the learned Single Judge under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(3.) DURING the pendency of the writ petition, by an interim order dated 29 January 2015, a report was called after a proper survey. The learned Single Judge recorded that a revenue team of two Revenue Inspectors, the Naib Tehsildar and Tehsildar had submitted a report indicating that the appellant had raised a boundary wall on certain land which belonged to the Gram Sabha. The learned Single Judge found, prima facie, that the appellant and his family are in unauthorised occupation of plot no.85 reserved for manure pits. In the view of the learned Single Judge, the letter of the Commissioner was "a mere letter" and that there was nothing to indicate that the Collector had acted on the basis of the communication. The learned Single Judge held that this was not a judicial order and did not require interference. Even otherwise, the report of the revenue team indicated prima facie that the appellant and his family were in unauthorised occupation and even if the proceedings under Section 122 -B are revived, they would not be illegal. The writ petition was hence dismissed. The only issue before the Court is whether the Commissioner, Moradabad Division, did have the jurisdiction to issue an administrative order on 12 December 2014, directing the Collector to review an order which he had passed in the quasi judicial capacity on 30 August 2014 in a revision arising out of proceedings under Section 122 -B. Plainly, the answer to that must be in the negative. The Commissioner appears to have acted merely on the basis of an application moved by the Government Counsel. The Commissioner was not exercising any higher judicial power against the order which the Collector passed in revision. As a matter of fact, the original order of the Tehsildar, which directed the withdrawal of the notice, also clarified that after a proper demarcation, proceedings under Section 122 -B could be revived or reinitiated.;