# Mukesh Pachauri v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2024) 9 ILRA 725
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2024-09-10
- **Case number:** Writ C No. 3568 of 2024
- **Bench:** Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/mukesh-pachauri-v-state-of-u-p-ors-52515
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

A. Civil Law - U.P. Zamindari Abolition and
Land Reforms Act, 1950- Sections 122-B -
U.P. Revenue Code,2006 - Section 67 - Power
to prevent damages, misappropriation, and
wrongful occupation of Gram Panchayat
properties - Fresh proceedings after earlier
proceedings dropped without adjudication on
merits - Permissible or not ? - In the instant
case, earlier proceedings under Section 122B of the Z.A. Act drawn against the
petitioner's father were dropped upon his
death, and there was no adjudication on
merits. Held: In a case where there is a
report
indicating
the
existence
of
encroachments, there is no bar to the
initiation of fresh proceedings under Section
67 of the Revenue Code merely because the
earlier proceedings had been dropped. No
illegality or lack of jurisdiction in the issuance
of the notice by the Assistant Collector. (Para
14, 15)
Disposed Off. (E-5)
726 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

## Text

9 All. Mukesh Pachauri Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
725
on merit as otherwise it may prejudice the
case of either of the parties.

116. Hence, without expressing
any opinion on merits of the respective
claim of election by the warring fractions,
but this Court is satisfied to the extent that
the order passed by the Deputy Registrar
dated 23.04.2022 has been passed without
forming any subjective satisfaction and it
suffers from the vice of being a nonreasoned order and such an order qualifies
to be termed as a rubber stamp order and
thus it cannot be sustained.

117. Accordingly, a writ in the
nature of certiorari is issued and the order
dated 23.04.2022 is quashed. The matter
shall
stand
remitted
to
the
Deputy
Registrar, who shall after affording an
opportunity of hearing to all the concerned
parties and after examining the records and
submissions of the respective parties and
taking note of the observations made by the
Court in this judgment, shall decide the
matter afresh by a reasoned and a speaking
order.

118. The Deputy Registrar shall
take up the matter expeditiously and the
parties are also directed to cooperate in
early hearing, so that the entire exercise can
be completed within a period of four
months, from the date, a copy of this order
is placed before the Deputy Registrar
concerned. Any party who does not
cooperate shall do so at their own peril and
the Deputy Registrar shall be well within
his right to proceed to comply with the
order as per the time line fixed.

119. The Writ Petitions bearing
WRIT-C No.3418 of 2022 is accordingly
allowed as a consequence the relief
claimed in Writ Petition being WRIT-C
No.14794 of 2021 cannot be granted hence
it is dismissed. However, there shall be no
order as to costs.
----------
(2024) 9 ILRA 725
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 10.09.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE DR. YOGENDRA KUMAR
SRIVASTAVA, J.

Writ C No. 3568 of 2024

Mukesh Pachauri ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Pradyumna Kumar Yadav, Sri K.P.S.
Yadav

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Sri Krishna Kant Singh
A. Civil Law - U.P. Zamindari Abolition and
Land Reforms Act, 1950- Sections 122-B -
U.P. Revenue Code,2006 - Section 67 - Power
to prevent damages, misappropriation, and
wrongful occupation of Gram Panchayat
properties - Fresh proceedings after earlier
proceedings dropped without adjudication on
merits - Permissible or not ? - In the instant
case, earlier proceedings under Section 122B of the Z.A. Act drawn against the
petitioner's father were dropped upon his
death, and there was no adjudication on
merits. Held: In a case where there is a
report
indicating
the
existence
of
encroachments, there is no bar to the
initiation of fresh proceedings under Section
67 of the Revenue Code merely because the
earlier proceedings had been dropped. No
illegality or lack of jurisdiction in the issuance
of the notice by the Assistant Collector. (Para
14, 15)
Disposed Off. (E-5)
726 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
(Delivered by Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra
Kumar Srivastava, J.)

1. Heard Sri K.P.S. Yadav, learned
Advocate holding brief of Sri Pradyumna
Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Sri J.N. Maurya, learned Chief
Standing Counsel appearing along with Sri
Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief
Standing Counsel, for the State-respondents
and Sri Krishna Kant Singh, learned
counsel representing the respondent Gram
Sabha.

2. The present petition has been filed
seeking to assail a notice dated 09.01.2024
issued by the respondent No. 4, the
Tehsildar, Khair, District Aligarh, in R.C.
Form- 20, under Section 67(2) of U.P.
Revenue Code, 2006.

3. Contention of the counsel for the
petitioner is that earlier proceedings under
Section 122-B of Uttar Pradesh Zamindari
Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950, had
been initiated in the year 2012, against the
petitioner's father, in respect of the same
plot of land, which resulted in passing of an
order dated 15.09.2012, by the Tehsildar,
directing
eviction
and
payment
of
compensation.

4. The aforesaid order was subjected
to challenge in a revision preferred by the
Gram Sabha, under Section 122-B(4-A) of
the Z.A. Act, which was decided by means
of an order dated 27.03.2014, passed by the
Additional Collector (Finance & Revenue),
Aligarh, in terms of which the earlier order
dated 15.09.2012 was set aside and the
matter was remanded, for passing a fresh
order, on merits.

5. It is sought to be asserted that the
aforesaid case being pending, there is no
occasion for initiating fresh proceedings by
issuing a notice under Section 67(2) of the
Revenue Code, in respect of the same plot
of land.

6. Counsel for the State-respondents
has pointed out that pursuant to the
previous
order,
instructions
dated
23.07.2024, have been received from Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Khair, Aligarh,
indicating therein that after remand by the
revisional court, the proceedings which had
been drawn under Section 122-B of the
Z.A. Act, against the father of the
petitioner, could not be concluded since the
petitioner's father had died, and an order
dated 03.04.2023 was passed in terms of
which the notice issued in Z.A. From 49-A
was withdrawn and a direction was issued
to the Area Lekhpal and Revenue Inspector
to carry out a spot inspection of the land in
question being Gata No. 173 and to submit
a report.

7. It is submitted that since a fresh
report has been submitted by the Area
Lekhpal, on the basis of a spot inspection,
indicating encroachments over the land in
question, by the petitioner, proceedings
under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue
Code, 2006, have been initiated with the
issuance of a statutory notice under R.C.
Form- 20.

8. It has been submitted that in a case
where there is a report which indicates
existence of encroachments, there is no bar
to initiation of fresh proceedings under
Section 67 of the Revenue Code, merely
because the earlier proceedings had been
dropped for same reason.

9. Accordingly, it has been contended
that the statutory notice which has been
issued, cannot be said to suffer from any
9 All. Somesh Prakash & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
727
want of jurisdiction, and a writ petition
challenging the same, would not be
entertainable, at this stage.

10. Section 67 of the Revenue Code
provides
power
to
prevent
damage,
misappropriation and wrongful occupation
of Gram Panchayat properties.

11. Where any property entrusted or
deemed to be entrusted to a Gram
Panchayat or other local authority is
damaged or misappropriated, or where any
Gram Panchayat or other authority is
entitled to take possession of any land
under the provisions of the Revenue Code
and such land is occupied otherwise than in
accordance with the provisions of the
Revenue Code, the Bhumi Prabandhak
Samiti or other authority or the Lekhpal
concerned, as the case may be, are required
to inform the Assistant Collector concerned
in R.C. Form - 19.

12. The Assistant Collector from the
information received or otherwise coming
to
his
knowledge
as
to
damage,
misappropriation or wrongful occupation of
Gram Sabha property, is required to initiate
action by issuing a notice under Section
67(2) of the Revenue Code to the person
concerned in R.C. Form- 20. The notice
which is to be issued is for showing cause,
as to why compensation for damage,
misappropriation or wrongful occupation,
be not recovered, and the person concerned
be not evicted from the land in question.

13. In the instant case the Area
Lekhpal having submitted a report on the
basis of a spot inspection indicating
encroachments over the land in question,
by the petitioner, the Assistant Collector, in
exercise of powers under Section 67(2) of
the Revenue Code, has issued a notice to
the petitioner to show cause, in the
prescribed R.C. Form- 20.

14. The earlier proceedings, under
Section 122-B of the Z.A. Act, drawn
against the petitioner's father, having
been dropped upon his death, and there
being no adjudication on merits, and the
fresh report submitted by the Area
Lekhpal, on
the basis of
a
spot
inspection,
being
indicative
of
encroachments over the land in question
by the petitioner, there would be no bar
to initiation of fresh proceedings under
Section 67 of the Revenue Code.

15. Counsel for the petitioner has not
been able to point out any patent illegality
or lack of jurisdiction in issuance of the
notice by the Assistant Collector.

16. Learned counsel for the petitioner
states that as the petitioner has already filed
his objections, he does not wish to press the
petition, and that the petitioner would
contest
the
proceedings
before
the
concerned respondent authority.

17. The petition stands disposed of
accordingly.
----------
(2024) 9 ILRA 727
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABD 20.09.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J.

Writ C No. 5229 of 2021
With
Writ C No. 4980 of 2021

Somesh Prakash & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents