STATE OF U P Vs. KRISHNA MURTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed by the State and is directed against an order passed by the District Judge, Meerut in Urban Land Ceiling Appeal No. 103 of 1977 dated 30th January, 1980. The appeal was allowed and the Competent Authority was directed to take steps under Section 27 of the Urban (Land Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 within sixty days from the date of order.

(2.) SMT. Krishna Murti, respondent No.1, and six of her children arrayed as Respondents 2 to 7 made an application under Section 27 (2) of the Act to the effect that they wanted to sell their house situated on plot no. 44-A Saket, Meerut in favour of one Shailendra Kumar Tyagi and Satyendra Kumar Tyagi. The Prescribed Authority found that SMT. Krishna Murti had a lease dated 8-3-1965 for 2,000 square yards of land in plot no. 44-A Saket, Meerut in her favour executed by Meerut Housing Society. He also held that her sons and daughters had no interest in the property and she had land in excess of the ceiling area. However, as she had not submitted a statement under Section 6 of the Act, the Competent Authority therefore decided to issue a notice under Section 6 (2) of the Act to her and indicated that permission could be given only after the determination of the surplus land.

(3.) MEERUT Urban Agglomeration belongs to category C in Schedule I to the Act. The ceiling limit for vacant land in category C is 1500 square metres wide Section 4. The petitioner No. 1 had one plot of land 44-A Saket, MEERUT measuring 1975.04 square metres and the constructed area measured 57.78 square metres. It has come in evidence that the land originally stood in the name of the husband of Smt. Krishna Murti and in 1961 the building plan of the house was passed by the authority concerned and the funding of the Appellate Authority is that only this much area had been built upon in the year 196!. According to Section 2 (q) (ii) of the Act 'vacant land' does not include the land which has been built upon with the approval of the appropriate authority. Such land would not be vacant land. Further, the land appurtenant to such building would also not be vacant land. The words 'land appurtenant' has been defined in Section 2 (g) of the Act. This includes land which is required to be kept as open space for the enjoyment of such building under the Building Regulations prevalent in the area but not exceeding 500 square metres in the case of any building constructed before the appointed date with a dwelling unit therein and additional extent not exceeding 500 square metres of land, if any, contiguous to the minimum extent referred to above. Thus, in a case where there is a building with a dwelling unit constructed over the land with requisite permission from the appropriate authority prior to the appointed date the land contiguous to that building to a maximum extent of 500 square metres of vacant land would be appurtenant land. It is imperative in such a case that there must be a building constructed before the appointed date with a dwelling unit therein. In other words, if there is a dwelling unit then it will qualify 500 square metres of appurtenant land as contiguous to the building. In the present case the existence of a building according to the sanctioned plan is established. It also shows that there is a dwelling unit. Consequently, the respondet no. 1 would be entitled to appurtenant land contiguous to the building not exceeding 500 square metres of land.