Powers under S. 122-C(6) of UPZA and LR Act vest only with Collector; not with Chief Revenue Officer: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court in a significant ruling has held that the order passed under Section 122-C(7) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act by the Collector u/s 122-C(6) of the Act shall be final and no revision would be maintainable therefrom.

The fact of the matter was that the Petitioner challenged an order dated 29.12.2000 passed by the Additional District Magistrate /Additional District Collector, Balrampur in a case u/s 122C(6) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act,1950 thereby in a suit filed by the private opposite party the authority has canceled the patta being granted in favor of the petitioner u/s 122C. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 23.1.2001 passed by the Additional Commissioner,Administration, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda in a revision whereby the revisional authority has rejected the revision holding that any order being passed u/s 122C(6) of U.P.Z.A. &L.R. Act is a final order, therefore, no revision would be maintainable.

The Bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J. dealt with the factual position and observed that the petitioner constructed one pakka room over the gata in question after 29.12.2000 when the impugned order has been passed wherein it has been categorically indicated that there was no construction over the gata in question and that fact has not been disputed by the petitioner before the revenue authorities.

It further observed that there was no proposal of the Gram Sabha /Land Management Committee to allot the land to the petitioners; no such document is available on record. As per the material available on record no list has been filed to convince the Court that a preferential list in terms of section 122C(3) of U.P.Z.A. &L.R. Act has been prepared. The impugned order dated 29.12.2000 provides that the petitioner is having his own residential house in the village and that fact has again been indicated by the S.D.O., Uttraula, Balrampur in its comments to show that the petitioner is living in his own house along with his family and no one is living in a pakka room constructed over Gata no. 396 on 0.008 Hect.

The bench observed that “the earlier order dated 5.2.1996 was passed by Chief Revenue Officer and that order may not be treated as order being passed u/s 122-C(6) inasmuch as the power to pass any order u/s 122-C(6) vests with the Collector, therefore, earlier revisional authority has rightly indicated this fact while setting aside the order dated 5.2.1996 passed by the Chief Revenue Officer. However, the impugned order dated 29.12.2000 has been passed by the Additional District Magistrate / Additional Collector having power u/s 122-C(6) ofthe U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. The impugned order dated 29.12.2000 is not an ex-parte order rather it has been passed after hearing all the parties including the petitioner and perused the material available on record.”

The Bench held that “the revisional authority has rightly rejected the revision of the petitioner vide order dated 23.1.2001 inasmuch as in view of 122-C(7) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act the order has been passed by the Collector u/s 122-C(6) shall be final.”

The Bench, while dismissing the writ petition, concluded that the impugned orders i.e. orders dated 29.12.2000 passed by the Additional District Magistrate / Additional District Collector, Balrampur in Case No. 7/11/19/49/31 filed u/s122C(6) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 and order dated 23.1.2001 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Administration, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda do not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. 

Case Title: Mohd. Naiem Vs. Additional Commissioner Admin Gonda And Others