NANHUMAL SRILAL Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE ALIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner No. 1 is a registered firm and petitioners Nos. 2 to 4 are its partners and have equal shares in the assets and liability of the firm. Petitioners in the name of petitioner No. 1 hold certain land and building within the municipal limit of Aligarh which includes a Dal Mill having total area of 5323.73 sq. metres. The aforesaid land was brought under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Petitioners submitted a statement under Section 6(1) of the Act on 14-8-76. The Competent Authority after making inquiry proposed 1970.73 sq. metres as vacant land in excess to the ceiling limit of the petitioners. An objection was filed against the said proposal. One of the objections was that the land covered by Pucca platform which is being used for drying pulses within the mill premises is not vacant land within the meaning of Section 2(q)(ii) of the Act. The Competent Authority rejected the said objection. Aggrieved the petitioners preferred an appeal to the District Judge, Aligarh. The District Judge partly allowed the appeal by an order dated 18-2-80 and reduced the area of vacant land from 1970.73 sq. metres to 1527.73 sq. metres. The appellate authority however rejected the contention of the petitioners for exclusion of 665.28 sq. metres covered by Pucca Chabutara as he was of the view that it does not amount to building and, therefore, it is vacant land. The petitioner has come up to this Court against the aforesaid orders passed by the competent as well as the appellate authorities by means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) Only contention advanced is that the area covered by the platform which is being used for drying pulses within the factory premises is a building and, therefore, is not vacant land within the meaning of Section 2(q) (ii) of the Act. 'Building' has not been defined in the Act. However, Section 2(q)(ii) of the Act provides that "vacant land" means land, not being land mainly used for the purpose of agriculture, in an urban agglomeration, but does not include in an area where there are building regulations, the land occupied by any building which has been constructed before or is being constructed on, the appointed day with the approval of the appropriate authority and the land appurtenant to such building. This clause suggests that in an area where the building regulations are in force the land occupied by building shall not be treated as vacant land. Admittedly in the city of Aligarh U.P. (Regulation of Building Operations) Act, 1958 was in force and, therefore, necessarily we have to fall back on the definition of 'Building' as given in U.P. (Regulation of Building Operations) Act 1958. Section 2(b) of the U.P. (Regulation of Building Operations) Act defines 'Building' which states that the building has the same meaning as in the Uttar Pradesh Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam, 1959. Section 2(6) of the U.P. Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam, 1959 defines 'Building' as follows :

(3.) Learned Standing counsel conceded that in view of the definition given in the U.P. (Regulation of Building Operations) Act, the cemented platform which is being used for drying pulses and which has been constructed with the approval of the authority, will come within the meaning of 'Building'. In view of definition of building the area covered by pucca platform which has sanction of the authority concerned, has to be excluded from the vacant land in excess to the ceiling limit of the petitioners. The competent authority as well as the appellate authority have erroneously held that the area covered by Pucca platform is not a building.