High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Mahangu & Others v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 4000 of 2006  RD-AH 2129 (27 January 2006)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 4000 of 2006.
Mahangoo and others. Vs. State of U.P. and others.
Hon'ble Janardan Sahai, J.
Heard Sri C.S. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri N.N. Verma holding brief of Sri V.K. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and the learned Standing counsel representing the respondent no. 1. Learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha has stated that no counter affidavit is proposed to be filed and the writ petition may be disposed of finally.
The petitioners counsel submits that the petitioner's belong to the scheduled caste and that they are in possession of the plot in dispute of the Gaon Sabha since 1386 fasali, that the land in question is not a public utility land and the petitioners are entitled to the protection of Section 122-B (4-F) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The petitioners indeed filed an application under Section 122-B (4-F). It is submitted that the Revenue Inspector and the Naib Tehsildar submitted a report in favour of the petitioners. It appears that proceedings under Section 122-B have also been instituted by the Gaon Sabha for the petitioners' eviction from the disputed land. By an order dated 18.12.2003 the application of the petitioners under Section 122-B (4-F) was dismissed on the ground that the proceedings under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act are pending against the petitioners. The petitioners filed a restoration application, which was dismissed on 26.12.2005 by the sub Divisional Officer, Meja, Allahabad, Section 122-B (4-F) begins with a non obstante clause and therefore has overriding effect. It is implicit that a person seeking protection under Section of 122-B (4-F) is a person belonging to the categories specified therein and is in possession of Gaon Sabha land. The view taken by the authorities below that the application under Section 122-B (4-F) is not maintainable in as much as the proceedings under Section 122-B are pending against the petitioners does not appear to be correct in view of the fact that the provisions of Section 122-B (4-F) have overriding effect.
In the circumstances the proper course for the authorities below is to consolidate the two cases under Section 122-B and that under Section 122-B (4-F). In case it is found that the petitioners fulfill the requirement of Section 122-B (4-F) the proceedings under Section 122-B are liable to be dismissed. In case however it is found that the petitioners do not qualify for the protection under Section 122-B (4-F) the petitioners can be evicted in accordance with the provisions of Section 122-B of the U.P Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act.
The orders dated 18.12.2003 and 26.12.2003 passed by the Up Ziladhiakri, Meja, Allahabad are set aside. The two cases shall be consolidated and disposed of in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.