Ashok Bhushan, J.
1. By these writ petitions the similar issues have been raised, hence, they are being disposed by this Common order. First two writ petitions were heard on 11.3.2008 and other three writ petitions were heard on 15.4.2008.
2. Sri Arun Srivastava has appeared for the petitioners in ail the writ petitions. Sri V.K. Singh appeared for Gaon Sabha and learned Standing Counsel appeared for the State respondents.
3. In writ petition No. 61871 of 2007 prayer has been made to quash the order dated 6.1.2006 passed by Sub Divisional Officer directing the expunction of the name of petitioners from class III (Aasami lease holder) and their ejectment. The petitioner filed revision against the said order which was dismissed by the revisional court vide its order dated 17.10.2007.
4. In writ petition No. 9232 of 2008 prayer has been made to quash the order dated 6.6.2006 passed by Sub Divisional Officer directing the expunction of name of petitioners as Aasami lease holder and their ejectment. Petitioners filed appeal which was dismissed on 23.8.2007, thereafter, they filed revision which has been dismissed vide order dated 13.11.2007.
5. The petitioners' case in the first writ petition is that the petitioners were granted Aasami lease of plot No. 224 and their names were recorded since 1375 Fasli in the revenue record as Aasami. The Sub Divisional Officer on a report submitted by the revenue inspector, registered a case No. 73 of 2004. Notice was issued to the petitioners. The petitioners filed objection before the Sub Divisional Officer raising various objections. The petitioners' case was that the land has been allotted to them and there being no period of lease petitioners have acquired right under Section 204 of the Act and they cannot be evicted. It was further claimed that petitioners belong to scheduled caste and they being in possession since before June, 1985, have become bhumidhari with nontransferable right The Sub Divisional Officer held that petitioners period of lease having come to an end they ought to have left the possession and they have no right to continue with the possession. Order was passed for expunging the names and ejecting the petitioners.
6. In writ petition 9232 of 2008 petitioners case is that they were granted Aasami lease of plot No. 67 and their names were recorded from 1375 Fasli. On the basis of a report the case was registered The petitioners appeared and filed objection on 4th June, 2004. The petitioners' case was that the land is not covered by Section 132 and land belonged to category 4 and no action having taken in the prescribed period petitioners have acquired bhumidhari right. It was further stated that case for cancelling the lease under Section 198(4) of the Act was filed which was dismissed. Oral evidence were also led. The Sub Divisional Officer ordered that petitioners being only Aasami and period of lease having come to an end they are liable for ejectment.
7. In writ petition No. 4029 of 2007, writ petition No. 64031 of 2007 and writ petition No. 64032 of 2007 the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order passed by Sub Divisional Officer who directed expunging the name of Aasami lease holder from the revenue record and the land to be recorded in the name of Gaon Sabha exercising power under Rule 176-A of the Zammdari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules. All the petitioners filed revision which have been dismissed. The petitioners' case in the writ petitions are that they are landless agriculture labourer belonging to scheduled caste and were granted lease. The petitioners' case further is that they were put in possession of the said land between 1375 to 1377 Fasli and since then they are in possession of the land in question. The proceedings were initiated against them on the report of Lekhpal and on the basis of said report, case was registered before the Sub Divisional Officer The petitioners filed their objections before the Sub Divisional Officer stating that they are Aasami lease holder and the name of their ancestors and their names are continuing in the record since 1969. It was further claimed that the land is not covered under Section 132 of the Act and they have acquired Sirdari right and now bhumidhari with nontransferable right.
8. Learned Counsel for the petitioners, challenging the impugned orders, contended that the petitioners, being agriculture labourer belonging to scheduled caste and having been in possession of the land in dispute since before May 1, 2002, have acquired bhumidhari with non-transferable right by virtue of provisions of Section 122-B (4-F) of the U.P. Zammdari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, 'hereinafter referred as 'the Act', and their names were not liable to be expunged from the revenue records and they were entitled for declaration as Bhumidahr with non-transferable right. The second submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that only procedure prescribed for evicting a Aasami is by instituting a suit by Land Management Committee under Section 202 of the Act and they were not liable to be evicted by the procedure as adopted by Sub Divisional Officer.
9. Learned Standing Counsel as well as Sri V.K. Singh, refuting the submission of petitioners, contended that petitioners are not entitled for the benefit of Section 122-B(4-F) of the Act. It was further submitted that the proceedings under Rule 176-A was rightly drawn and petitioners have been ejected in accordance with law.
I have considered the submissions and perused the record.
10. In so far as the second submission of the petitioners that for ejectment only a suit can be filed under Section 202 of the Act, the said submission has already been rejected by this Court in the case of Hari Ram v. State of U.P. reported in 2004 RD 360. An Aasami lease can very well be determined under Rule 176-A. The main submission of the petitioners which needs consideration is as to whether petitioners are entitled for the benefit of Section 122-B(4-F) of the Act. The petitioners' case in the writ petition is that they were granted Aasami lease and their names are recorded as Aasami in the revenue record since 1375 Fasli. The petitioners' case, thus, is that they are in possession of the land in dispute by virtue of being Aasami and they have perfected rights under Section 122-B(4-F) of the Act. For appreciating the submission of learned Counsel for the petitioners it is necessary to note the scheme, purpose and object of insertion of Section 122-B(4-F) of the Act.
11. Section 122-B of the Act was inserted in the Act enumerating the power of Land Management Committee and Collector with regard to any property vested in Gaon Sabha and local authority. The object for insertion of provision was to protect the Gaon Sabha property from being damaged and misappropriated. Sub-section 1, 2, 3, 4 and 4(4-F) of Section 122-B of the Act are quoted below:
122-B. Powers of the Land Management Committee and the Collector-(1) Where any property vested under the provisions of this Act in a Gaon Sabha or a local authority is damaged or misappropriated or where any Gaon Sabha or a local authority is entitled to take or retain possession of any land under the provisions of this Act, the Land Management Committee or local authority, as the case may be, shall inform the Assistant Collector concerned in the manner prescribed.
(2) Where from the information received under Sub-section (1) or otherwise, the Assistant Collector is satisfied that any property referred to in Sub-section (1) has been damaged or misappropriated or any person in occupation of any land referred to in that subsection, in contravention of the provisions of this Act, he shall issue notice to the person concerned to show cause why compensation for damage, misappropriation or wrongful occupation as mentioned in such notice be not recovered from him or, as the case may be, whey he should not be evicted form such land.
(3) If the person to whom a notice has been issued under Sub-section (2) fails to show cause within the time specified in the notice or within such extended time not exceeding [thirty days] from the date of service of such notice on such person, as the Assistant Collector may allow in this behalf, or if the cause shown is found to be insufficient, the Assistant Collector may direct that such person may be evicted from the land and may, for that purpose, use, or cause to be used such force as may be necessary and may direct that the amount of compensation for damage, misappropriation or wrongful occupation be recovered from such person as arrears of land revenue.
(4) If the Assistant Collector is of opinion that the person showing cause is not guilty of causing the damage or misappropriation or wrongful occupation referred to in the notice under Sub-section (2) he shall discharge the notice.
(4-A) ...
(4-B) ...
(4-C) ...
(4-D) ...
(4-E) ...
(4-F) Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing subsection, where any agricultural labourer belonging to a Schedule Caste or Scheduled Tribe is in occupation of any land vested in a Gaon Sabha under Section 177 (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 by the Land Management Committee or the Collector against such labourer, and [he shall be admitted as bhumidhari 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 bhumidhari with non-transferable rights in that land].
12. The provision of Section 122-B of the Act indicates that notice is to be issued when property has been damaged or misappropriated or any person is in occupation of land in contravention of provision of this Act and cause is to be shown as to why compensation or damages for wrongful occupation be not recovered. Sub-section 4-F is an exception to the scheme of Section 122-B which provides that where any agricultural labourer belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe is in occupation of any land vested in a Gaon Sabha from before May 1, 2002 then no action under this Section can be taken by the Land Management Committee or Collector and he shall be admitted as bhumidhari with non-transferable right of that land under Section 195 of the Act.
Section 122-B of the Act provides power of Land Management Committee and the Collector. Sub-section 4-F was added by UP. Act No. 35 of 1976. The provision as inserted indicates that it was for protection of agriculture labourer belonging to scheduled caste and scheduled tribe. The Legislature identified only one category of the most weakest Section of the society for extending the benefit on the basis of their occupation of any land vested in Gaon Sabha. The purpose was to protect the weakest Section of the society from being evicted from Gaon Sabha land. It was further contemplated that the land be settled with them as bhumidharr with non-transferable right. The Apex Court in the case of Manorey alias Manohar v. Board of Revenue (U.P.) and Ors. reported in : [2003]3SCR274 had occasion to consider the provision of Sub-section 4-F of Section 122-B and object and purpose of insertion in the Act. Following was laid down in paragraph No. 8 of the Judgement:
First, the endeavour should be to analyse and identify the nature of the right or protection conferred by Sub-section (4-F) of Section 122-B. Sub-sections (1) to (3) and the ancillary provisions up to Sub-section (4E) deal inter alia. With the procedure for eviction of unauthorized occupants of land vested in Gaon Sabha. Sub-section (4-F) carves out an exception in favour of an agricultural labourer belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe having land below the ceiling of 3.125 acres. Irrespective of the circumstances in which such eligible person occupied the land vested in Gaon Sabha (other than the land mentioned in Section 132), no action to evict him shall be taken and moreover, he shall be deemed to have been admitted as a bhumidhar with non-transferable rights over the land, provided he satisfies the conditions specified in the sub-section. According to the findings of the Sub-Divisional Officer as well as the appellate authority, the appellant does satisfy the conditions. If so, two legal consequences follow. Such occupant of the land shall not be evicted by taking recourse to Sub-sections (1) to (3) of Section 122-B. It means that the occupation of the land who satisfies the conditions under Sub-section (4F) is entitled to safeguard his possession as against the Gaon Sabha. The second and more important right which Sub-section (4F) confers on him is that he is endowed with the rights of a bhumidhar with nontransferable rights. The deeming provision has been specifically enacted as measure of agrarian reform, with a thrust on socio-economic justice. The statutorily conferred right of bhumidhar with non-transferable rights finds its echo in Clause (b) of Section 131. Any person who acquires the rights of bhumidhar under or in accordance with the provisions of the Act, is recognized under Section 131 as falling within the class of Bhumidhar. The right acquired or accrued under Sub-section (4F) is one such right that falls within the purview of Section 131(b).
13. The issue which has arisen in these petitions is as to whether those persons who are occupying Gaon Sabha land by virtue of an Aasami lease are also entitled for protection under Sub-section 4-F of Section 122-B. Whether the Legislature while inserting Sub-section 4-F intended that said benefit will also be extended to all Aasami lease holders who are occupying the land, is question to be answered. Chapter VIII of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act provides for 'tenure'. Section 129 of the Act provides for four class of tenure holder which also includes Aasami. Section 131 of the Act is a provision which provides for Bhumidar with non-transfer right. It is also relevant to note that by amendment made in Section 131 of the Act those allottees who were allotted land of ceiling surplus were also declared bhumidhar with non-transfer right. Section 131 of the Act is quoted below
131. Bhumidahr with non-transferable rights.- Every person belonging to any of the following classes shall be called a Bhumidahr with non-transferable rights, and shall have all the rights and be subject to all the liabilities confferred or imposed upon such bhumidhars by or under this Act, namely-
(a) every person admitted as a sirdar or any land under Section 195 before the date of commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Land Laws (Amendment) Act, 1977, or as a bhumidhari with non-transferable rights under the said Section on or after the said date.
(b) every person who in any other manner acquires on or after the said date, the rights of such bhumidhar under or in accordance with the provisions of this Act;
(c) every person who is, or has been allotted any land under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1952.]
[(d) with effect form July 1, 1981 every person with whom surplus land is or has been settled under Section 26-A or Sub-section (3) of Section 27 of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holding Act, 1960]
14. Section 131(A) is another illustration of a particular category of cases who were conferred bhumidhar with non-transferable right. Section 131 (A) of the Act is quoted below:
[131-A. bhumidhari rights in Gaon Sabha or State Government land in certain circumstances.- Subject to the provisions of Section 132 and Section 133-A, every person in cultivatory possession of any land, vested in a Gaon Sabha under Section 117 or belonging to the State Government, in the portion of district Mirzapur south of Kaimur range, other than the land notified under Section 20 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, before the 30th day of June, 1978, shall be deemed to have become a bhumidhar with nontransferable rights of such land:
Provided that where the land in cultivatory possession of a person together with any other land held by him in Uttar Pradesh, exceeds the ceiling area determined under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, the rights of a bhumidhar with non-transferable rights shall accrue in favour of such person in respect of so much area of the first mentioned land, as together with such other land held by him, does not exceed the ceiling area applicable to him, and the said area shall be demarcated in the prescribed manner in accordance with the principles laid down in the aforesaid Act
15. Section 132 of the Act is a provision which provides that no Bhumidhari right shall accrue in certain category of land Section 132 of the Act is quoted below:
132. Land in which [bhumidhari] rights shall not accrue.- Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 131, but without prejudice to the provisions of Section 19 [bhumidahn] rights shall not accrue in-
(a) pasture land or lands covered by water and used for the purpose of growing Singhara or other produce of land in the bed of a river and used for casual or occasional cultivation;
(b) such tracts of shifting or unstable cultivation as the State Government may specify by notification in the Gazette, and
(c) lands declared by the State Government by notification in the Official Gazette, to be intended or set apart for Taungya plantation or grove lands of a [Gaon Sabha] or a local authority or land acquired or held for a public purpose and in particular and without prejudice to the generality of this Clause-
(i) lands set apart fro military encamping grounds,
(ii) lands included within railway or canal boundaries,
(iii) lands situate within railway or canal boundaries,
(iv) land included in sullage farms or trenching grounds belonging as such to a local authority,
(v) lands acquired by a town improvement trust in accordance with a scheme sanctioned under Section 42 of the U.P. Town Improvement Act, 1919 (U.P. Act VII of 1919), or by a municipality for a purpose mentioned in Clause (a) or Clause (c) of Section 8 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 (U.P. Act VII of 1916), and (vi) lands set apart for public purposes under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act 1953 (U.P. Act Vof 1954).
16. Section 133 of the Act provides for Aasami. According to Section 133 of the Act there are four category of Aasami, one of the category of Aasami is provided under Section 133 of the Act. Sub-clause (C) is the lease granted by Land Management Committee after the date of vesting of land described under Section 132 of the Act. Thus, Aasami rights can accrue to a person by grant of lease fry Land Management Committee on the land described under Suction 132, thus, although no Bhumidhan right can (sic) of a lend enumerated under Section 132 of the Act but grant of Aasami right is clearly contemplated It is further relevant to note that benefit of Sub-section 4-F of Section 122-B of the Act shall not accrue on a land described under Section 132 of the Act, thus, the Legislature, while inserting Sub-clause 4-F, excluded he grant of bhumidhari with non-transferable right in a land covered under Section 132 of the Act.
17. It is thus, relevant to examine as to Aasami lease which are claimed by the petitioners are in which category of Section 133 of the Act. The petitioners themselves in all the above writ petitions have pleaded grant of Aasami leases and claimed to ht ve come in possession of the land between 1375 to 1377 Fa li which is specifically pleaded by all the petitioners in all the writ petitions. In the objections filed by the petitioners, it is also mentioned that their names were recorded by virtue of an order dated 23rd March, 1969 passed by Sub Divisional Officer. Thus, the Aasami leases claimed by the petitioners are after the date of vesting. It is further case of petitioners that they were granted Aasami leases by the Land Management Committee and it is also admitted that land in dispute belonged to Gaon Sabha. Although the objections was filed by some of the petitioners claiming that the land does not belong to Section 132 of the Act but from the pleadings in the writ petitions and from the category of Aasami leases as mentioned under Section 133 of the Act, the Aasami leases of the petitioners fall under Section 133(c) of the Act Section 133 (c) of the Act contemplates grant of Aasami leases by the Land Management Committee of land described under Section 132 of the Act. Thus, the leases granted to the petitioners are leases of the land which is enumerated under Section 132 of the Act.
18. This Court in the case of Babu Nan dan v. Board of Revenue, U.P. Allahabad reported in 1993 RD 195 had laid down that the rights under Sub-section 4-F of Section 122-B shall not accrue on a land which is mentioned in Section 132 of the Act. Paragraphs No. 6 and 7 of the judgment is quoted below:
6. Now Section 195 enjoins the Land Management Committee with the powers to admit any person as Bhumidahr with non-transferable right in respect of three categories of land enumerated in that Section other than the land covered by any of classes mentioned in Section 132 of the Act. In other words, the land of Classes mentioned in Section 132 of the Act is specifically excluded from the purview of Section 195 and the Land Management Committee has no power to admit any person and grant non-transferable Bhumidahn rights in respect of the land falling within any of the classes mentioned in Section 132 of the Act. A reference to Seciton 132 would show that it speaks of the land in which Bhymidhar rights shall not accrue and vide Clause (c)(vi) it is stipulated that Bhumidanri rights shall not accrue in the land set apart or public purposes under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953.
7. from the provisions referred above, it is evident that the provisions of Section 195 have no application to the lands enumerated in Section 132 of the Act, inasmuch as, in respect of such lands, the Land Management Committee has no power to admit any person and grant non-transferable bhumidhari rights. It follows that the beneficial fiction by granting the deemed benefit spoken of in Section 122-b(4-F) will not be available to a person in respect of the lands covered by Section 132, for, such lands being out of purview of Section 195. This legal position is further fortified by the non-obstante opening portion of Sub-section (4-f) itself, which grants beneficial fiction only in respect of 'land vested in Gaon Sabha under Section 117' and specifically excludes 'not being land mentioned in Section 132. Thus, the classes of land mentioned in Section 132 have been kept well out of beneficial fiction by the provisions of Section 122-B(4-F) itself. In short, once it is found that the land in question is of one of the classes enumerated in Section 132.' the person in occupation of such land shall not be entitled to he benefit of beneficial fiction under Section 122-B (4-F), nor under Section 195 of the Act.
19. There is one more aspect of the matter which needs to be noted. Sub-section 4-F has been inserted in Section 122-B of the Act. Section 122-B(4-F) carves out an exception for limited category of a person. Sub-section 4-F has to be interpreted keeping in view the others Sub-sections of same Section 122-B of the Act. Sub-section 4-F does not contemplate giving right to Aasami lease holder. It is well settled principle of statutory interpretation a that while interpreting Sub-section of a Section all parts of Section has to be taken together The principle that the statLte must be read as a whole is equally applicable to the different parts of the same Section It is useful to refer the judgement of Balasinor Nagrik Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Babubhai Shankerlal Pandya and Ors. reported in : AIR1987SC849 . The Apex Court in the said case had considered Section 36 of Gujrat Co-operative Societies Act and while considering the parts of Section 36 following was laid down. In paragraph No. 4:.It is an elementary rule that construction of a section is to be made of all parts together. It is not permissible to omit any part of it. For, the principle that the statute must be read as a whole is equally applicable to different parts of the same section.
20. Sub-section 4-F having been inserted in Section 122-B it has to take colour from Section 122-B and object and purpose of Section 122-B. Sub-section 4-F did not intend to confer rights to Aasami lease holder who were continuing in possession by virtue of leases granted to them by the Land Management Committee as noticed above. For conferring bhumidhari with non-transferable right to lessee of ceiling surplus amendment was made in Section 131 of the Act.
21. There is one more reason for taking above view. Section 197 of the Act provides for admission to land mentioned in Section 132 of the Act. Section 198 of the Act provides for order of preference in admitting persons to land under Section 195 and 197 of the Act. Section 198 Sub-section 1 of the Act lays down an order of preference. Rule 176-A of the Rules provides that Aasami lease shall not be made for a period exceeding five years. The object and purpose for grant of Aasami leases for limited period is that after expiry of period the leases may either be allowed to continue or be determined so as to consider for fresh settlement to a deserving person. The grant of Aasami lease and re-grant of same land to deserving person is a continuous process for benefiting the deserving and eligible persons of the society. The social and economic condition of a person keeps on changing, the occupation aJso keeps on changing. A person may not be agricultural labourer in certain period of time but may become an agricultural labourer at one point of time. The continuous process for grant of lease is to protect the eligible and deserving members of society. In case leases granted to one particular category of persons is treated to be settled the said lease will not be available for re-grant to even a more deserving person. Thus Section 122-B(4-F) of the Act cannot be interpreted to mean that Aasami lease holders rights were conferred bhumidhari with non-transferable right. Thus the benefit of Section 4-F of Section 122-B of the Act cannot be extended to Aasami lease holders and the submission of petitioners' Counsel that by virtue of Section 122-B (4-F) of the Act they have become Bhumidharwith non-transferable right cannot be accepted.
22. The petitioners being Aasami lease holder and their period of leases having come to an end no illegality was committed by the Sub Divisional Officer in determining their leases under Rule 176-A of the RUes. The notice was issued to the petitioners who filed their objections. It is ft -ther relevant to note that petitioners in their objections have claimed that perpetual Aasami leases were granted to them. The submission that petitioners were granted perpetual Aasami leases cannot be accepted. In U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules under Rule 171 there is always provision for grant of Aasami lease for a period of seven years After the amendment in Rule 176-A of the Rules the period of Aasami lease has been confined to five years. Against the order of Sub Divisional Officer the petitioners filed revision before the revisional court. The revisional court relying on the judgment of this Court in Hariram's case ((supra)) has held that petitioners leases can be determined. There is no error in the orders passed by the courts below warranting any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is, however, observed that in event it is decided by Land Management Committee or by Assistant Collector to again grant Aasami lease of the same land, the petitioners, if they come withm the eligibility, their cases may also be considered.
23. Subject to observations made above all the writ petitions are dismissed.