A. N. Varma, J. - (1.) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 1st October, 1988 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Allahabad in purported exercise of power under section 15-A of U. P. Bhoodan Yagna Act, 19 52 cancelling the allotment of plot no. 97 measuring 2 bighas 18 biswas in favour of the petitioner.
(2.) SHORTLY stated the relevant facts are that the petitioner was allotted the aforesaid plot under Section 14 of the above mentioned Act. Respondent no. 2, Bal Mukund, made an application before the Additional District Magistrate, Allahabad claiming that the land belonging to him is in abadi, that the petitioner wrongly got the same allotted in her favour even though she was neither a landless agricultural labourer nor was she a person whose main source of livelihood was agricultural labour or cultivation. On the contrary she was the wife of the Pradhan of the village who had extensive land measuring 20 to 22 bighas. It was further stated that the husband of the petitioner had acquired more land and in support of this allegation various extracts of Khasra and Khatauni were filed. On an application moved by Bal Mukund, the Additional District Magistrate called for a report from the Tahsildar who after making inquiry submitted a report in favour of the petitioner stating that she was a landless agricultural labour and that the land had been legally and properly allotted to the petitioner. The Additional District Magistrate by the impugned order cancelled the Patta executed in favour of the petitioner on the ground that her husband owned agricultural land measuring 2 Bighas 13 Biswas and 12 Biswansis. That being so the petitioner could not be characterised as landless agricultural labourer and consequently the allotment made in her favour was irregular and was liable to be cancelled. On this finding the Patta granted in favour of the petitioner was cancelled by the impugned order and it was directed that the land would be deemed to have vested in Bhoodan Yagna Samiti.
(3.) SRI T. P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, has challenged the aforesaid order on the ground that in the first place the land belonging to the husband of the petitioner could not be taken into account in determining, whether the petitioner was, at the relevant time, a landless agricultural labourer. Secondly the land, referred to in the order as belonging to the petitioner, was inherited by her husband after allotment was made in favour of the petitioner. On both these counts it was alleged that the said land could not be taken into account in cancelling the petitioner's Patta. Sri Krishna Ji Khare, appearing for the respondent, on the other hand urged that several objections had been raised by Bal Mukund against the allotment of the disputed land in favour of the petitioner. The first objection was that the disputed land was in abadi and that it did not and could not vest in Bhoodan Yagna Samiti. Secondly, the petitioner could not be said to be a landless agricultural labourer as her husband possessed extensive land measuring 20 to 22 Bighas. It is urged that the Additional District Magistrate did not consider these objections and wrongly directed that the land to have vested in Bhoodan Yagna Samiti.;