RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA), J. - (1.) HEARD Sri V. Singh, for the review applicant and Standing Counsel, for State of U.P. and Sri Amresh Singh, Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat.
(2.) THE writ petition was filed against the orders of Additional Collector, dated 29.09.2001, canceling the patta of the petitioner, in proceeding under Section 198 (4) of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and Additional Commissioner, dated 26.09.2014, dismissing the revision of the petitioner. After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition was dismissed by order dated 21.11.2014. Now the petitioner has filed this review application.
(3.) ON the complaints of the villagers, an inquiry was conducted by Tahsildar, who submitted a report dated 26.07.1998 for cancellation of the patta dated 28.11.1997 of the petitioner and two other persons, stating therein that Land Management Committee did not pass any resolution for allotment of the land to the petitioner and the alleged resolution dated 28.10.1997 was fabricated by Lekhpal and approval/patta dated 28.11.1997 was granted to the petitioner. On its basis, cases under Section 198 (4) of the Act were initiated against the petitioner, Ram Prasad and Smt. Sukhdei, which is now numbered as Case No. 32 of 2001. On the notice being served, the petitioner filed his reply on 17.04.1999. It was stated by the petitioner that Land Management Committee of the village Himmatpur Taharpur had held meeting for allotment of the land on 28.10.1997, in which a resolution was passed for allotting plots 36 (area 0.036 hectare), 37/354 (area 0.006 hectare) and 123/1 (area 0.228 hectare) to him. Lekhpal submitted his report relating to resolution and other papers. On being satisfied, Sub -Divisional Officer approved the resolution and patta was granted to the petitioner on 28.11.1997. His names was also mutated in the khatauni and he was in possession of the land allotted to him. Before Additional Collector, on behalf of State and Gram Panchayat, Ram Bahadur (Member), Balli Ram (Lekhpal), Shahida Begum (Pradhan) and Ayaz Mohammad (Member) were examined and photostat copy of Proceeding Register of Gram Panchayat was filed. The petitioner filed documentary evidence, examined Dwarika Prasad, Kalicharan (Chaukidar), Chandra Babu, Ram Prasad and Jamuna Prasad (Lekhpal). Additional Collector, after hearing the parties by order dated 29.09.2001 found that Pradhan in her statement has stated that after being elected as Pradhan, she conducted three meetings of Land Management Committee, first meeting was adjourned for want of coram, in second meeting land was allotted for construction of building of Primary School and in third meeting 12 persons were allotted land for house sites. Alleged meeting dated 28.10.1997 was neither called by her nor it was held in the village. In the resolution, her signatures have been fabricated. Statement of Pradhan was fully corroborated by two members of Land Management Committee. There was no reason for these witnesses to give false statement against the petitioner. As such, it was found that no meeting for allotment of the land was held on 28.10.1997 by Land Management Committee and the papers relating to meeting and allotment of the land has been fabricated by the then Lekhpal, on which, approval was granted on 28.11.1997. On these findings patta of the petitioner and Ram Prasad and Smt. Sukhdei were canceled. The petitioner filed a revision (registered as Revision No. 45/13/3/ 12,13) against the aforesaid order. The revision was heard by Additional Commissioner, who by judgment dated 26.09.2014, confirmed the findings of Additional Collector and dismissed the revision. Hence this writ petition was filed. After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, it was found that although Pradhan and two members of Land Management Committee had denied for calling of any meeting for allotment of land but the petitioner, did not moved any application for summoning the original Registers, relating to agenda, meeting and resolution or obtaining expert report from in respect of signatures of Pradhan on the copy of resolutions on which approval for grant of patta to the petitioner was granted. As such finding of fact, recorded by two Courts below, relying upon the statement of Pradhan and two members of Land Management Committee do not suffer from any illegality and no interference is required. On these findings the writ petition was dismissed.;