Court No.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 5749 of 2001 (Old No.10775 of 1994) Gyan Chandra & others …….. Petitioners Versus The State of U.P. through Collector, Hardwar and others …….. Respondents …………………. Sri Abdul Wahid, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri H.M.Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Date: July 24,2008 Hon’ble P.C.Verma,J. This petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 26.05.1993 passed by Assistant Collector/Tehsildar, Hardwar and 14.12.1993 passed by Additional Collector, Hardwar. 2. On the report of Lekhpal that the petitioners are in unauthorized occupation of land plot No.18/13/8 area 5.740 hectares and plot No.113/12 area 2.049 hectares, proceeding under Section 122-B of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (in short the Act) was initiated for their eviction in the year 1988. The petitioners before the Assistant Collector contested case and the Assistant Collector on 30.03.1990 dropped the proceeding against the petitioners in case No.143 of 1988. In the revision filed by the Gaon Sabha the case was remanded on 20.05.1992. The case was again decided by the Assistant Collector on 26.05.1993 observing that the petitioners are not entitled to the benefit of Section 122 B (4-F) of the Act. He ordered for eviction of the petitioners from the disputed land and also imposed penalty of Rs. 9690/-. The said order was challenged by the petitioners before the Additional Collector, Hardwar in revision bearing No.29 of 1993. The Additional Collector affirmed the order of eviction and dismissed the revision by the impugned order. Aggrieved by this order, the petitions have come up with this writ petition. 3. It is alleged by the petitioners that they are landless and belong to scheduled caste community. They have been cultivating the disputed land from before the Zamindari Abolition and have been growing crops. It has come in the evidence that the disputed land is not river and except this land the petitioners have no land. It is also not disputed that the petitioners belong to scheduled caste community. The disputed land is recorded as agricultural land. It is cultivable land. 4. Section 122-B of the Act deals with powers of the Land Management Committee and the Collector. Section 122-B (4-F) of the Act provides that no action shall be taken by the Land Management Committee or the Collector against agricultural labourer belonging to a Scheduled Caste who is in occupation of any land vested in a Gaon Sabha under Section 117 and he shall be admitted as bhumidhar with non- transferable rights of that land. Section 122-B (4-F) of the Act reads as under:- “(4-F) Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing sub-section, where any agricultural labourer belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe is in occupation of any land vested in a Gaon Sabha under section 117 (not being land mentioned in section 132) having occupied it from before May 1, 2002, and the land so occupied together with land, if any, held by him from before the said date as bhumidhar, sirdar or asami, does not exceed 1.26 hectares (3.125 acres), then no action under this section shall be taken by the Land Management Committee or the Collector against such labourer, and he shall be admitted as bhumidhar with non-transferable rights of that land under section 195 and it shall not be necessary for him to institute a suit for declaration of his rights as bhumidhar with non-transferable rights in that land”. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the aforesaid provision, the petitioners are entitled to get benefit under Sec. 122-B (4-F) of the Act. 6. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders are quashed. No order as to costs. (P.C.Verma,J.) 24.07.2008 P.singh