NAGINA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by 9 tenure holders claiming themselves to be the recorded tenure holders of the disputed plots which is alleged to have been declared as surplus under the provisions of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling and Land Holdings Act.

(2.) The contention raised is that the land in question had been settled in favour of the Petitioners by the erstwhile Zamindars of the land and by virtue of such settlement, they have become Seerdars and again Bhumindhars i.e. tenure holders in their own right under the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1950, by operation of law.

(3.) The Petitioners also contend that their names were recorded in the revenue records and for that they have relied upon the extract of Khatauni between 1366-1368 Fasli and 1372-1374 Fasli. They also contend that the land has been allegedly declared surplus in the hands of such persons, who are alleged to be the tenure holders whereas the correct facts are that the said land has already been settled in favour of the Petitioners and cannot be treated to be surplus.