JAI SHANKAR SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF UP AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall govern Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petitions Nos. 4808 and 5736 to 5739 of 1963. Writ Petition No. 4808 of 1963 is by the tenure -holders, Jai Shanker Singh and others, while the other four by the transferees of the tenure -holders. All the writ petitions pertain to land which was originally a tank, but it appears that the land of the tank had been occasionally or for a long period cultivated by persons with the consent of the then zamindars. The tenure -holders claimed to be Bhumidhars and as such had transferred, the Land to the Petitioners of writ petitions Nos. 5736 to 5739 of 1963, but on a perusal of the lease it transpired that the lessees had no right of transfer and hence it is no longer in dispute that the tenure -holders were mere sirdars and not Bhumidhars. Sirdars can not transfer their holding to other persons and the transfer, if made, shall be in contravention of the provisions of the UP ZA and LR Act (to be referred hereinafter as the Act) and the transferees cannot claim any title to the land. In the circumstances, there can be no dispute in that the Petitioners of writ petitions Nos. 5736 to 5739 are mere trespassers. Their transferor can, however, have the status of a Sirdar.

(2.) THE Gaon Samaj had instituted a suit Under Section 212 of the Act on the ground that the tank was a land of public utility. Before the suit could be decided, notification Under Section 4 of the UP Consolidation of Holdings Act was published and that suit was stayed. In one way the dispute in so far as the tenure -holders are concerned is meant to eject them to make the tank of public utility available to the public. The case of the transferees, however, stands in a different category and they can be ejected on other grounds also.

(3.) IF the above contention is accepted, it will virtually mean that the consolidation authorities can take no action Under Section 212 of the Act. In a proceeding Under Section 212 a person can be ejected from a land of public utility even if he has a valid title to the land. A person may be sirdar or Bhumidhar of such land but for the public good he can be diverted of his right on payment of compensation. A perusal of Section 212 shall make it clear that the dispossession of a person having a valid title or having no title is dependent upon payment of a compensation as prescribed. The compensation has been prescribed under the UP ZA and LR Rules and the rule also makes it evident that under this provision a Bhumidhar or sirdar can be divested of his rights and he can be dispossessed of the land.