DARSHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri V.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel for the State-respondents No.1 to 4. None has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent No.5 despite the service being sufficient.

(2.) At the very outset, learned standing counsel has raised an objection that the instant writ petition has been filed by four different persons, who purchased the land separately, however, the petition has been filed jointly and the Court Fee of Rs.100/- has been paid which is insufficient, hence, the matter may not be heard as far as petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are concerned.

(3.) Shri V.K. Pandey has submitted that he shall file the Court fee and the matter may be heard on behalf of all the four petitioners. Upon the assurance, the matter has been heard and as assured by Shri Pandey, has also filed the Court fee, which is taken on record. The petitioners assail the order dated 19.04.1991 passed by the Prescribed Authority (Ceiling) Nigasan, District Kheri whereby in pursuance of the notice issued under Section 10(2) of the U.P.