High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Mewa Lal & Another v. State Of U.P. Thru' Revenue Secretary, Lucknow & Ohters - WRIT - C No. 43275 of 2006  RD-AH 13412 (11 August 2006)
"Court No. 4"
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 43275 of 2006.
Mewa Lal and another
State of U.P., through Revenue Secretary, Lucknow and others.
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar, J.
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
The petitioners who were served with a notice in Form 49 A, submitted their reply/objection to the notice in the proceeding under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (In short 'the Act'), which has been initiated against them. The petitioners appeared before the Assistant Collector/Tehsildar, who after hearing the parties vide his order dated 31st July, 2002 found that despite time granted to the petitioners for adducing the evidence, if any, no evidence has been adduced. He further found that the petitioners are un-authorised occupants of the land in dispute, therefore directed for eviction of the petitioners and damages were also imposed upon the petitioners. Thereafter the petitioners filed an application before the Assistant Collector for recalling the order dated 31st July, 2002 wherein they have taken a case that they have not been permitted to adduce the evidence. The Assistant Collector vide his order dated 13th February, 2003 dismissed the petitioners' recall application holding categorically that the petitioners have been given full opportunity to adduce the evidence, but despite time granted no evidence has been adduced by them. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners preferred a revision before the Additional Collector under Section 333 of 'the Act', who after hearing the parties vide its order dated 29th December, 2004 dismissed the revision preferred by the petitioners and upheld the order passed by the Assistant Collector. Against the order dated 29th December, 2004, the petitioners filed review application, which has also been dismissed by the Additional Collector vide its order dated 13th January, 2006, hence this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners argued that they have not occupied any land as alleged and further that they have not been afforded any opportunity to adduce the relevant evidence in support of their case. I have gone through the orders passed by the Courts below
- 2 -
and found that the petitioners' case have been dealt with by both the sub-ordinate authorities and categorically held that the petitioners have been given full opportunity to adduce the evidence in support of their, but they did not file any evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioners have not been able to demonstrate that the findings arrived by the Assistant Collector and affirmed by the Additional Collector suffer from any error, much less error apparent on the face of record, which may warrant any interference by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
In view of what has been stated above, this writ petition has no force and is accordingly dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.