KASHI RAM Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE DEHRADUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition arises out of proceedings under the Urban land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents.

(3.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Dr. Smt. Jagjit Kaur owned and held property No. 3A, 3416 sq. Smt. Jagjit Kaur filed a return under Sec. 6 of the Act in the year 1976. A draft statement under Sec. 8(4) of the Act was issued on 15-10-77 whereby it was proposed to acquire 1416 sq. M. of the land as being surplus. At the instance of the landholder Jagjit Kaur, the said order was set aside and she was afforded an opportunity to file objection. After taking into consideration the objections filed by Smt. Jagjit Kaur the competent Authority held by order dated 23-1-78 that Smt. Kaur was holding 1416 sq. m. of the land in excess of the ceiling limit, Aggrieved by that order Smt. Kaur filed an appeal No. 73 of 1978. The order passed by the competent Authority was set aside and it was held that Smt. Kaur was not possessed of any excess vacant land. The State filed a writ petition before the High Court which too was dismissed. The State further preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court and consequent upon the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in L.J. Johnson's case, the case was directed to be reopened.