Janardan Sahai, J. - (1.) The petitioners are allottee's of agricultural land. A resolution for allotment of the land in favour of the petitioners was passed by the Land Management Committee on 10.6.1990. The resolution was approved by the Sub-Divisional Officer by the order dated 20.12.1991. An application under section 198 sub-section (4) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, was filed by the respondent No. 4 Jai Bir Singh. The Addl. Collector, (Finance and Revenue) Ghaziabad by his order dated 26.10.1995 cancelled the allotment. He found that there was no munadi and the procedure under Rule 173 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules was not followed. He also found that in the eligibility list 57-Kha there was an entry at serial No. 16 and the allotment was shown against the said entry but the name of the person was not shown and the column in front of serial No. 16 was vacant. It was also found that some of the Scheduled Caste allottee's (three of them) were allotted 12 biswas, 10 biswani and 1 bigha 10 biswani and in case they had been allotted an area of 3.125 acres each there would have been no irregularity. The order of the Addl Collector was challenged by the petitioners in revision before the Addl Commissioner (Judicial), Meerut Division, Meerut who by his order dated 8.1.1997 made a reference to the Board of Revenue that the revision be allowed and the case be sent back to the Collector for a fresh decision. The ground given by the Addl. Commissioner is that the Collector did not give any finding regarding ineligibility of the allottee's. The Board of Revenue rejected the reference and dismissed the revision by its order dated 22.10.1997. The finding recorded by the Board of Revenue is that there was no munadi and that the proceed ings were irregular and appear to be farzi. The petitioners have challenged the order of the Board of Revenue.
(2.) I have heard Sri C.S. Agnihotri Counsel for the petitioners and Sri V.K. Singh Counsel for the Gaon Sabha and Sri S.D. Pandey Counsel for respondent No. 4 Jai Bir Singh. The Board of Revenue has affirmed tire order of the Addl. Collector. The Addl Collector has found that in case allotment to the three Scheduled Caste persons had been made upto the extent of 3.125 acres, there would have been no ground for compliant. Under Rule 173 of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules the Land Management Committee shall whenever it intends to admit any person to land under sections 195 or 197 announce the number of plots, their areas and the date on which the admission therein is to be made. Thus if is for the Land Management Committee to decide upon the number and size of the plots. Undisputedly some of the allottee's are persons of the Scheduled Caste. There is no material to indicate that any of the Scheduled Caste allottee's was ineligible. In para 21 of the writ petition it is stated that the petitioners No. 1 Vijai Pal, petitioner No. 2 Vasdeo, petitioner No. 11 Netrapal, petitioner No. 12 Duli Chand, petitioner No. 13 Sukhan and petitioner No. 14 Dhanesh are Harijans and landless agriculture labourers. In the counter affidavit there is no denial of this fact that these are landless Harijans. What is stated in para 11 of the counter affidavit in reply to the averments made in para 21 of the writ petition is that the procedure under Rule 173 of the Rules was not followed and the allotment was fraudulently obtained. There is no material however to indicate that these Scheduled Caste persons are ineligible. Even if there are other Scheduled Caste persons in the village the allotment in favour of these Scheduled Caste petitioners cannot be said to be illegal as they belong to the same preferential category, in fact the Addl. Collector has himself found in respect of these Scheduled Caste allottee's that had they been allotted land of 3.125 acres which is more than what has been allotted there would have been no irregularity. The allotment in favour of the Scheduled Caste persons is therefore liable to be maintained. The preferential category of the petitioners of other castes is lower down. In the counter affidavit it has been stated that there are other persons in the village belonging to the Scheduled Caste who are landless. The finding of the Board of Revenue that munadi was not done and the procedure for allotment was not followed, is a finding of fact, and not shown to be vitiated by error of law. This finding would affect the allotment made to persons of non - Scheduled Castes as there are stated to be Scheduled Caste landless persons who have not been allotted land. The order cancelling their allotment is maintained. Fresh settlement in respect of the plots allotted to non-Scheduled Caste persons shall be made by the Gaon Sabha in accordance with law. It is open to all eligible persons including the petitioners of backward and other Castes to apply but it is made clear that the allotment shall be made in accordance with law and order of preference provided under section 198(1) of the Act. The allotment in favour of the Scheduled Caste petitioners is maintained.
(3.) The writ petition is thus allowed in part. Petition Partly Allowed.;