Sunita Agarwal, J. - (1.) The present petition is directed against the orders dated 07.11.2016 and 13.11.2017 passed by the Consolidation Authorities in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for according benefit of Section 122-B (4-F) of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act. It appears that pursuant to the proceeding under Section 157-AA read with Section 167 of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, the suit No.8/2006-07 was registered against the petitioner in whose favour, registered sale deed dated 29.10.2001 was executed by the recorded Bhumidhar namely Smt. Tikana as no prior permission was taken from the Assistant Collector before execution of the said sale deed.
(2.) Vide order dated 13.12.2007, the Collector held that the sale transaction vide sale deed dated 29.10.2001 was hit by Section 157-AA of the Act and the said transaction being void under Section 166 of the Act, the consequence of Section 167 will follow. Resultantly, the land in question stood vest in the State Government under Section 167 of the Act. It was, accordingly, declared as the State land and possession was directed to be transferred to the Gram Sabha for the maintenance thereof. This order was challenged in revision which was dismissed on 31.07.2009.
(3.) Before the revisionial Court, a prayer was made by the petitioner that he being the landless agricultural labourer in possession of the Gram Sabha land was entitled to benefit of Section 122-B (4-F) of the Act. The revisional Court refused to entertain the said plea with the finding that the area and field of operation of Section 167 and Section 122-B (4-F) are different. In a proceedings under Section 167, the rights of the tenure holder extinguishe and the land vests in the State on account of violation of provisions of Section 157 (AA), the purchaser cannot be given benefit of Section 122-B (4-F). Moreover, the revisionist/purchaser did not produce any evidence regarding the agricultural holding in his possession being less than 3.18 acre. The revision was, accordingly, dismissed vide order dated 31.07.2009.;