Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46871 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1004335 of 2004 Petitioner :- Chandra Pal And 3 Ors Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Collector Unnao And 3 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- S.K. Mehrotra,I.D.Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C,R.N Gupta Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J. 1. Heard Sri I.D. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for respondent - State. 2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioners are challenging the orders dated 02.01.2004 passed by Tehsildar, Purwa, District Unnao and notice dated 05.03.2003 annexures 8, 9 , 10 & 11 to the writ petition. 3. Factual matrix of the case is that Rajaswa Nirikshak submitted a report on 20.08.2002 to the Tehsildar Purwa stating that the petitioners were entitled to the benefit of government order and also entitled to regularization of their possession over the plot in dispute. The petitioners submitted their applications on 03.09.2002 for regularization of their cultivatory possession under Section 122 -B (4F) of U.P. ZA&LR Act, 1950 stating that the petitioners belonging to scheduled castes and they have been in possession of the plot in dispute since before the appointed date and they have become bhumidhar with non transferable rights. This application was submitted by the petitioners along with affidavit to which Tehsildar passed an order on 28.07.2003 directing the entries tobe made over plot in dispute as bhumidhar with non transferable rights to each of the petitioner over the plot in dispute. 4. Names of the petitioners were also mutated in the relevant khatauni. The Tehsildar vide order dated 02.01.2004 recalled the orders without issuing notices and without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The Additional Commissioner, Judicial, Lucknow Division, Lucknow rejected the revision filed by the petitioners without considering the claim setup by the petitioners. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned order of recalling the earlier order of mutation has been passed without notice and without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The statement of fact in this regard has been made in paragraph 17 of the writ petition. As no counter affidavit has been filed till date, therefore, the statement of fact is admitted that the order is without notice and opportunity of hearing. In the memo of revision which is page 69 annexure 15, they have taken the ground of violation of principles of natural justice in paragraph 17. The revisional court without considering the same has rejected the revision vide impugned order dated 24.06.2004. 6. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that without affording opportunity of hearing and without issuing notices to the petitioners, the order impugned cannot be passed by the Tehsildar, Purwa, District Unnao. 7. His next submission is that in the memo of revision specific ground of violation of principles of natural justice was taken that the Tehsildar concerned without issuing any notice and opportunity of hearing has passed the impugned order dated 02.01.2004 but the revisional court while passing the impungned order has not taken care of the ground taken by the petitioenrs on 24.06.2004. 8. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the impugned orders are just and valid and do not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. 9. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 10. On perusal of impugned order and statement of fact made in paragraph 17 of the writ petition, it is admitted that the order impugned dated 02.01.2004 has been passed without notice and without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, therefore, it is in violation of principles of natural justice. The revisional court has also not taken care of the ground taken in the memo of revision by the petitioners that prior to passing of the order dated 02.01.2004, no notice nor opportunity of hearing was afforded to them. 11. Accordingly, the orders suffer from vices of principles of natural justice. The revisional court has also failed to take into consideration that the impugned order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. 12. On over all consideration of facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the impugned order has been passed without notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, therefore, the the same are liable to be quashed. 13. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 02.01.2004 and 24.06.2004 are hereby quashed. 14. The writ petition succeeds and is allowed. 15. The respondents are directed to adopt legal recourse available to them. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 Adarsh K Singh Digitally signed by :- ADARSH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench