GHANSHYAM Vs. THE COLLECTOR, FATEHPUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The proceedings were taken against the petitioner under Sec. 122-B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. The petitioner was given a notice in respect of plot No. 16 area 0.0048. The petitioner filed objection stating that his house is existing and it is his ancestral house. The Additional Tehsildar recorded a finding that the land was recorded as Banjar and it was never recorded as Abadi land. He disbelieved the version of the petitioner. The petitioner filed revision against the said order. Respondent No. 1 has dismissed the revision on 29-1-1996.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the findings recorded by respondents 1 and 2. A person will have a right over the land on the basis that his building was existing provided that the building was in existence on the enforcement of U.P.Z.A. L.R. Act. The land in dispute has been recorded as Banjar. In C.H. Form 45 also the land has been shown as Abadi land. In absence of any documentary evidence to show that the petitioner's house was existing prior to the enforcement of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act and the land having not been allotted to him by the Land Management Committee in accordance with the provisions of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, the petitioner's ejectment from the disputed land by the impugned order does not suffer from any manifest error of law.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner then urged that respondent No. 2 has awarded Rs. 10.000.00 as damages while recording the finding that the petitioner had constructed the house in 139-F. The order passed by respondent No. 2 on the facts and circumstances of the case in respect of awarding the damages appears to be arbitrary and excessive. Respondent No. 1 has not recorded any finding in this respect.