JUDGEMENT
Siddhartha Varma, J. -
(1.) This case has been filed against orders by which the Pattas of Hari Charan, predecessor in interest of the petitioners were sought to be cancelled.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Hari Charan was granted a Patta in the year 1962 of Plot No.22, 33Ka, 34Ka and 35Ka situate in village Rahkalan, Pargana Kantit, Tehsil Madihan, District Mirzapur and had got the status of Bhumidhar with non-transferable rights. Hari Charan with an intention to sell the property, on 21.9.1973 deposited an amount equivalent to 20 times the rent payable on the plots in question and became a Bhumidhar with transferable rights. Thereafter on 21.9.1973 itself, Hari Charan executed a sale deed in favour of Vansh Narayan and Ram Dular sons of Har Govind and one Awadh Narayan son of Ram Raj. Ram Dular son of Har Govind, who had, after the sale deed, become an owner sold, in his turn, his share to Raj Mani Yadav son of Jhaggad. Awadh Narayan son of Ram Raj sold his 1/3rd share to one Ram Jiyawan. Raj Mani Yadav and Ram Jiyawan jointly sold their properties, which they had bought from Hari Charan, to Biggad, the predecessor in interest of petitioner no.3. Hari Charan had sold the property to Vansh Narain (through whom the petitioner nos.1 and 2 claim). Thereafter, in the year 1997, proceedings under section 198(4) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was sought to be initiated against Hari Charan, the initial tenure-holder, saying that while he was a Bhumidhar with non-transferable rights, he had sold the property and, therefore, the Pattas had to be cancelled and the land had to vest in the Gaon Sabha. When notices were issued to Hari Charan, a report was sent that he was no longer living in the village. This forced the petitioners to file an Impleadment Application and to file an objection to the proceedings which were initiated under section 198(4) of the Act. In the proceedings, the petitioners objected that since the sale deeds were executed by Hari Charan after he had deposited 20 times of the land revenue payable on the land in question and had become a Bhumidhar with transferable rights and, therefore, there was nothing wrong in the transfer which the Hari Charan had made.
(3.) The Chief Revenue Officer on 27.9.2008, cancelled the pattas which were granted to Hari Charan and vested the land in question in the Gaon Sabha. The petitioner nos.1 and 2 filed a Revision wherein they very categorically stated that the Chief Revenue Officer had no authority to cancel the pattas as the Collector alone could have done so. They further submitted that as per section 137 of the Act, which was prevailing at the time when the sale deed had been executed, the seller of the property who had sold the land to the petitioners had become a Bhumidhar with transferable rights, the moment he had deposited 20 times of the rent. The petitioners further, in the revision, submitted that before the Chief Revenue Officer they were not allowed to file any document else they would have submitted their documents and evidence. Had the opportunity been granted, they would have definitely filed the Bhumidhari Sanad which was there in favour of their seller Hari Charan and if the Sanad was looked into, it would have been clear that though it was given by the Assistant Collector on 13.12.1973, it had to date back to the date when the amount equivalent to 20 times of the rent was deposited. Both the Courts below, however, rejected the claim of the petitioners and stated that the petitioners had not filed any document which would have gone to prove that 20 times rent payable on the land which was sold was actually deposited and, therefore, both the Courts below held that since the vendor of the petitioners was a Bhumidhar with non-transferable rights, the transfer effected in favour of the predecessors in interest of the petitioners was illegal and void and, therefore, held that the land had to vest in the Gaon Sabha. Aggrieved by the two orders, the petitioners had filed the instant writ petition.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.