- (1.) S. P. Srivastava, J. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents.
(2.) PERUSED the record. Feeling aggrieved by the orders passed by the Additional Commissioner and the Board of Revenue in the proceedings initiated against the petitioners under the provisions contained in Section 122-B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act whereunder accepting the recommendation of the Additional Commissioner, the Board of Revenue, has, after setting aside the order passed by the Sub- Divisional Officer dated 27-3-90 remanded the case to the Sub-Divisional Officer for deciding the same in consonance with the provisions of law keeping in view the provisions of Section 122-B (F) of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, they have now approached this Court seeking redress praying for the quashing of the order passed by the Additional Commissioner and the Board of Revenue. The facts in brief, shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this case lie in a narrow compass. The petitioners had moved an application dated 20-12-88 claiming benefits contemplated under Section 122-B-4 (F) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act praying for the correction of the revenue entries in respect of the land in dispute and recording of their names as "asankramaniay Bhumidhar" thereof. Proceeding on the basis of the report of the Lekhpal and the supervisor Kanoongo submitted to the Sub-Divisional Officer, the said officer had, indicating that the petitioners were entitled to the benefits contemplated under Section 122-B (4-F) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, directed for the correction of the revenue entry in respect of the land in dispute which was shown as 'nai particultivable Banjar' land in the name of the aforesaid persons showing them as Asankramaniya Bhumidhar Varg 2'.
(3.) SUBSEQUENT to the passing of the order dated 29-4-89 the Gaon Sabha passed a resolution dated 18-6- 89 praying for the setting aside of the order dated 29-4-89 and initiated proceedings for the ejectment of the petitioners. On the basis of the said resolution an application for the purpose was filed by the Gaon Sabha but the said application was rejected by the Sub-Divisional Officer observing that the order dated 29-4-89 was not liable to be disturbed leaving it open for the Gaon Sabha to proceed in accordance with law. The Gaon Sabha thereafter filed a revision challenging the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer. The Additional Commissioner came to the conclusion that the entire proceedings culminating in the order dated 29-4-89 were hastely concluded without considering the real implications of the provisions contained in Section 122-B (4-F) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and without realising that one of the plots viz Plot No. 136 had been recorded as Talab and a land of public utility in respect whereof no claim as put forward by the applicants could be entertained. It was also observed that the materials on the record did not lead to an inference that the petitioners were continuing to be in possession on the relevant date. In the aforesaid view of the matter the Additional Commissioner recommended to the Board of Revenue for the setting aside of the order dated 29-4-89 with a direction to the Sub-Divisional Officer to hold an enquiry in the matter and in case the petitioner satisfied the eligibility criteria provided for under Section 122-B (4-F) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, in that event consider their claim for being recorded as bhumidhar of the land in dispute.;