COURT NO.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) 702/2001 (Old No. 5789/2000) Shyam Singh …….Petitioner Versus Collector, Udham Singh Nagar And Others. …….Respondents Sri M.C. Bansal, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Sri H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 1 & 2. Sri Vijay Bhatt, learned Counsel for the respondent no. 3. 4th August, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 19.1.2000 passed by the Collector, Udham Singh Nagar, whereby the revision of the petitioner filed under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act challenging the order dated 5.1.1994 passed by the Tehsildar, Kashipur has been rejected. 2. Facts, in brief, giving rise to present writ petition are that a report was lodged by the Lekhpal/Secretary of Land Management Committee, Kashipur in respect of property in question in the court of Tehsildar, Kashipur. It was alleged that the disputed land is the property of village Amritpur upon which the petitioner Shyam Singh had illegally encroached upon and occupied the same. Petitioner filed objection to the said report of the Lekhpal denying the case as put in the notice. It was claimed by the petitioner that the land in dispute is his ancestral 2 property and is a part of an area covered by his ancestral grove and that he is the Bhumidhar of the land in dispute. He submitted that the area in question has been wrongly shown in the notice as a Banjar land. 3. The petitioner also asserted that since the land in question comes within the limits of Nagar Palika Jaspur, therefore, proceedings under Section 122-B of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act read with Rule 115-D of the Rules could not have been initiated and that petitioner was not liable to ejectment from the land in question. 4. Tehsildar, Kashipur enquired into the matter. Statements of the parties were recorded and evidence was adduced. Tehsildar vide his order dated 5.1.1994 ordered for the ejectment of the petitioner from the land in dispute and imposed an amount of Rs. 645/- as damages. Order of the Tehsildar dated 5.1.1994 is contained in Annexure 2 to the writ petition. 5. Against the judgment and order dated 5.1.1994 passed by the trial court, petitioner preferred revision before the Collector, which was dismissed vide order dated 19.1.2000, which is contained in Annexure No. 6 to the writ petition. 6. The matter is concluded by the concurrent finding of facts by the courts below. No interference is called for by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. Writ petition is dismissed accordingly. However, it is provided that the petitioner may file a suit under Section 3 229-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and get his title declared. If the suit for declaration of title is filed within three months from today, the same shall be decided within further three months and only till then, the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the disputed land and recovery against him shall also stand stayed till then. (P.C. Verma, J.) 4.8.2008 Prabodh