- (1.) Heard Shri Vishun Narain, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents, Shri Yogendra Nath Yadav, learned counsel representing the Land Management Committee of the village concerned and Shri Brijesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel representing the respondent no.5.
(2.) These proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have been instituted by the petitioner challenging an order dated 21.07.2017 passed by the Assistant Collector (First Class)/Sub Divisional Officer, Sarojani Nagar, Lucknow, whereby he has cancelled the earlier orders dated 10.01.2006 and 20.08.2010 by means of which the land in question was ordered to be vested in the State. By the said order dated 21.07.2017 the Sub Divisional Officer has also ordered that the land in question, namely, gata no.3132/5, having an area of 4 bigha situate in village-Kakori, Pargana and Tehsil-Lucknow, district-Lucknow be recorded in the name of respondent nos.5 to 9. The petitioner also challenges the order dated 17.12.2018 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Lucknow Division, Lucknow whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 21.07.2017 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer has been dismissed.
(3.) The facts of the case, which can be culled out from the pleadings available on record are that in respect of land in question three agreements to sell dated 19.03.1997, 23.04.1997 and 15.06.1997 were executed by the respondent no.5-Pokhelal and predecessors in interest of respondent nos.6 to 9, namely, Radhey Lal and Ayodhya Prasad in favour of the petitioner which is a Cooperative Housing Society. Some complaint appears to have been made and accordingly a report was submitted by the Tehsildar concerned to the Sub Divisional Officer for drawing proceedings in terms of the provisions contained in section 166/167 of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act (herein after referred to as 'the Act'). The Sub Divisional Officer after issuing notices to Radhey Lal, Ayodhya Prasad and Pokhelal, proceeded to consider the matter and passed an order on 10.01.2006 whereby he ordered that the land in question be vested in the State free from all encumbrances. The Sub Divisional Officer while passing the said order dated 10.01.2006 has observed that at the time of execution of the alleged agreements to sell in favour of the petitioner-society, Radhey Lal, Ayodhya Prasad and Pokhelal were not recorded as Bhumidhar and as such they were not entitled to handover the possession of the land in question. The order dated 10.01.2006 further records that Radhey Lal, Ayodhya Prasad and Pokhelal were not declared to be Bhumidhar with transferable rights only by means of the order dated 18.12.2004 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer in a suit under section 229-B of the Act. The Sub Divisional Officer thus concluded that the agreements to sell have not been cancelled by any court of competent jurisdiction and since Radhey Lal, Ayodhya Prasad and Pokhelal belong to reserved category of Scheduled Caste, as such without seeking permission as per requirement of section 157-A from the Collector, the agreements to sell with possession could not have been executed by them in favour of the petitioner.;