COURT NO. 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) 127/2006 (Old No. 9390/1991) Bindra …….Petitioner Versus Upper Collector, Dehradun & Other ……Respondents. Sri Lokendra Dobhal, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Sri H.M. Raturi, Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 1. 3 rd July, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the judgment and order dated 29.11.1990 passed by the respondent no. 1/ Upper Collector, Dehradun under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner belongs to scheduled caste and is landless agricultural labourer. Petitioner is in possession over the land in dispute since 1975 and has become bhumidhar by operation of law with effect from 30th June, 1985 and on the basis of the provisions of sub-Section (4-F) of Section 122-B of the Act, the land settled in favour of the petitioner and the proceedings are barred under Section 122-B (4-F) of the Act. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, Teshisdar, Dehradun by his order dated 17.10.1989 had withdrawn the notice under Section 49-Ka and proceedings under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act were also dropped against the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 17.10.1989, State and Gaon Sabha preferred a join revision before the Additional Collector, Dehradun. The Additional Collector, Dehradun by the impugned order dated 29.11.1990 allowed the revision and passed an order of ejectment against the petitioner and also imposed Rs. 3200/- towards damages. 4. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 5. Since petitioner is the landless agricultural labourers belonging to Scheduled Caste and is in possession over the land in dispute, therefore, they are entitled for settlement of the land in his favour. As such, the proceedings under Section 122-B(1) of the Act were rightly dropped by the Tehsildar. The Additional Collector, Dehradun erred in allowing the revision against the order of the Tehsildar. 6. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and impugned order dated 29.11.1990 passed by the respondent no. 1 is hereby set aside and the order of the Tehsildhar dated 17.10.1989, whereby proceedings under Section 122-B (1) of the Act initiated against the petitioner were dropped, is hereby affirmed. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 3.7.2008 Prabodh