LAKHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the Respondents.

(2.) Learned standing counsel states that since a pure question of law is involed it is not necessary to file a counter-affidavit at this stage.

(3.) The Petitioner is a tenure holder against whom proceedings were initiated under the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 and the Prescribed Authority vide order dated 28.2.2011 declared certain land as surplus in the hands of the Petitioner. Aggrieved the Petitioner has preferred an appeal being Ceiling Appeal No. 3 of 2010-11 which has been admitted on 15.4.2011. However, while admitting the appeal the application for an interim relief has been rejected on the ground that there is no justification for grant of any interim order.