Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

8. After having heard counsel for the parties and after perusing the records, it is clear that other submissions raised by counsel for the parties have already been dealt in Writ Petition No. 4934 of 1999, hence need not be mentioned here. The only submission which is required to be considered in the present case is the submission of counsel for the petitioners based on Section 122B (4F) of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. Although there is no pleading in the writ petitions by the petitioners claiming rights on the basis of Section 122B (4F) but since the question relates to applicability of Section 122B (4F) and may arise when the matter is heard by Deputy Director of Consolidation, it is in the fitness of things to permit the petitioners to raise this submission in the writ petitions.

9. The contention of the counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners belong to Scheduled Caste and they having continuing in possession of the respective chaks since before relevant date under Section 122B (4F) of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, have acquired right over the land belonging to Gaon Sabha and the said land cannot be taken away and the impugned order dated 22.9.1998 by which the aforesaid plots have been taken away is illegal. Sub-section (4F) of Section 122B of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act has been substituted by U. P. Act No. 24 of 1986. The said sub-section is one of the sub-sections of Section 122B of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. Section 122B of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act relates to power of the Land Management Committee and the Collector. Section 122B is extracted below :

From the provisions of Section 30, it is clear that all the plots which are allotted in a chak of tenure holder, the tenure-holder acquires right and title. Thus, if any portion of Gaon Sabha land is allotted in chak of a tenure holder, the said tenure-holder acquires the right and title in the aforesaid plot. The chak allotment proceedings under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act are subject to revision and appeal as contemplated under the Act. Under Section 48 of U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, the Deputy Director of Consolidation has jurisdiction to examine the record of any case decided or proceeding taken by any subordinate authority for the purposes of satisfying himself as to the regularity of the proceedings or as to legality or impropriety of any order. The allotment made under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act thus can be changed, modified exercising the power of Deputy Director of Consolidation. Section 122B (4F) contemplates giving right to an agricultural labourer belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe of the Gaon Sabha land, who does not have any right to be in possession. After the allotment under the U. P, Consolidation of Holdings Act, tenure-holder gets right and is entitled to be in possession of the aforesaid land. Thus, with regard to chak allotted to tenure-holder under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, there is no scope of applying provisions of Section 122B (4F). Section 122B is essentially a provision relating to powers of Land Management Committee and the Collector for taking action against person, who occupied or misappropriated the Gaon Sabha property. Thus, Sub-section (4F) is also attracted to similar nature of land, i.e., the land to which the person occupying has no title. While interpreting sub-sections of any section the provisions have to be read as whole. The Apex Court in Kalawatibai v. Soiryabai and Ors., 1991 (3) SCC 410, held in paragraph 6 as under:

"6. ..... It is well-settled that a section has to be read in its entirety as one composite unit without bifurcating it or ignoring any part of it. Viewed from this perspective, the section, undoubtedly, comprises two parts, one descriptive, specifying the essential requirements for applicability of the section, other consequences arising out of it. One cannot operate without the other. Neither can be read in isolation. Both are integral parts of the section ....."

Thus, while construing the nature of land on which Sub-section (4F) will be held to be applicable, the aforesaid provisions of Section 122B has to be taken into consideration. Sub-section (4F) contemplates giving right to a person of deeming himself to be bhumidhar with non-transferable rights whereas he does not have any right on the Gaon Sabha property on which he is in occupation since before the particular date. The aforesaid is not a situation with regard to allotment of land under U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. The petitioner was, admittedly, allotted land including the plots belonging to Gaon Sabha and he continued in possession on the basis of aforesaid allotment. His possession and interest on the land are on the basis of allotment. Firstly, the said allotment is always subject to power of Deputy Director of Consolidation under Section 48 of U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, hence, the Deputy Director of Consolidation can always exercise power for changing, correcting, modifying the allotment and provisions of Section 122B (4F) does not create any kind of prohibition in exercise of right by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. Secondly, the provisions of Section 122B (4F) are not applicable on a land on which petitioner is in possession in pursuance of allotment made under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, by virtue of the allotment he is in possession of the land and his possession and title over the land till the said allotment survives cannot be said unauthorised possession. The possession of the said person being not unauthorised, there is no question of applicability of Section 122B (4F). Thus, the submission of the counsel for the petitioner based on provisions of Section 122B (4F) of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act has no substance. The said provision does not come to any aid of the petitioner.