SANJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises for determination in this appeal is whether involuntary transfers such as a Court sale, is a transaction valid under the provisions of sub-sections (6) and (8) of Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (for short 'the Ceiling Act'), and to be reckoned in decreasing the surplus area

(2.) One Jagdish Chander was a tenure-holder in village Bijeser Bijoria, Distt. Shahjahanpur in the State of U. P. He had a large holding being over 100 acres of land. On 10-10-1974, he was served with a notice containing the necessary statement of his holding under the provisions of Section 10 (2) of the Ceiling Act. A proposal was appended therewith as to which of his area was proposed to be declared 'surplus'. The tenure-holder thereafter filed certain objections. His objections maintly were that his entire holding was unirrigated and had wrongly been termed as irrigated' and for this twist, he gave various reasons. He also raised the plea that he had one major unmarried daughter and therefore was entitled to get two additional hectares of land for her. He did not mention about his son. Perhaps he was a minor on the crucial date. Lastly, he made an option to effect a change in the lands proposed to be declared surplus. These facts are crystal clear from the narration given in the order of the additional District and Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur, Appended as Annexure 'A' to the special leave petition.

(3.) During the pendency of the proceedings, Jagdish Chander died and his heir Ajai Verma was substituted in the year 1984. On 22-8-1984, 82.49 acres of land of the tenure-holder was declared 'surplus'. The matter rested there so far as Jagdish Chander and his family members were concerned. The matter for them became closed.