D.P.GUPTA, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition was taken up today for final hearing with the. consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioner, in this case, has urged that the Collector, Sri Ganganagar has passed as order dated April 28, 1978 (Annexure 4) terminating the lease (Theka) of the petitioner for the year 1978 -79 without giving any mice to him and that the said order should be quashed by this Court as it was passed against the principles of natural justice. The petitioner's case is that the land mentioned in schedule A, attached to the writ petition, situated in village Mainawali, was given to him on lease for a period of three years from the year 1976 -77, at the rate of 500/ - perbigha by a resolution of the Gram Panchayat, Mainawali dated October 1, 1976 after it was kinked down in his favour at a public auction held on August 4, 1976 and that while he was enjoying the possession of the aforesaid land, and was cultivating the same, the Collector. Sri Ganganagar passed his order dated April 28, 1978 terminating the aforesaid 'theka' of the petitioner for the year 1978 -79 because according to him the theka was given to the petitioner for a period if two years only, namely for the years 1976 -77 and 1977 -78, and that the petitioner is a nephew of the former Serpent, Khyali Ram and that although the theka was given only for a period of one year, yet by making certain interpolations in the documents it was shown by the former Sarpanch as if the theka was given for a longer term of three years. According to respondents, the former Sarpanch Khyali Ram of Gram Panchayat, Mainawali in collusion with the petitioner, caused interpolations in the relevant documents for the purpose of giving undue and illegal benefit to the petitioner who was his close relative.
(3.) HOWEVER , it was not contested before me that the order dated April 28, 1978 was passed by the C Elector, Sri Ganganagar without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. At the time of hearing of the writ petition, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 admitted that the petitioner was not heard by the Collector while passing the impugned order dated April 28, 1978;