KHOOB LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition arises out of the proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976.

(2.) THE facts in brief, are these. THE petitioner filed a statement under section 6 (1) of the Act. THEreafter the draft statement was prepared under section 8 (1) of the Act and a copy of the same was served upon the petitioner who filed his objections. It seems that the petitioner did not appear on the date fixed and did not lead any evidence in support of his objections. THEreafter, the Competent Authority passed his order under section 8 (4) of the Act. A true copy of the said order dated 25-6-1981 is Annexure 1 to the petition. THE Competent Authority held that 1595.76 Sq. Metres was the excess vacant land in the hands of the petitioner. THEreafter, an appeal was filed and in the said appeal the petitioner moved the court to grant permission to file certain additional documentary evidence. However, the appellate court rejected the said prayer and dismissed the appeal by its judgment dated 17-8-1982, a true copy of which is Annexure II to the petition. A certified copy of the said judgment is also on the record. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has come up in the instant petition and in support thereof, I have heard Sri H. S. Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner. In opposition, the learned Standing Counsel has made his submissions. Though the writ petition contains a number of grounds, I do not propose to enter into same. THEre is one aspect of the matter which Sri Joshi emphasised and which I consider to be relevant.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY, I allow this petition and quash both the said orders. The case is now remanded to the Competent Authority to proceed in the manner as stated above. It seems to me that it will be just and expedient that the Competent Authority should prepare a fresh draft statement under section 8 (3) of the Act in the light of the statement which was submitted by the petitioner under section 6 of the Act and further in the light of such enquiry as the competent Authority may deem fit to make on the basis of the material on the record including his own survey which he carried out and which has been referred to in para 4 of the counter affidavit. After such fresh draft statement has been prepared containing the particulars as specified under Sec. 8 (2) of the Act, the same shall be served on the petitioner together with a notice stating that any objection to the draft statement shall be preferred within 30 days of the service of the said statement and the notice on the petitioner. The Competent Authority shall thereafter proceed to pass his order under section 8 (4) of the Act in accordance with the procedure prescribed therein. It is needless to emphasise that as I have directed the proceedings to be started anew in the manner as stated above, the petitioner will have full opportunity to file his objections after he is freshly served with the new draft statement and thereafter he will have full opportunity to adduce the necessary evidence, oral and documentary, in support of his objections on the date which will be fixed for the entertainment of his objections, if any. Here I would like to emphasise that the Competent Authority and the appellate court both have pointed out that the petitioner has been negligent and non-cooperative in the ceiling proceedings which were taken against him before the Competent Authority. It is hoped that the petitioner will be more cooperative and diligent in the proceedings which will take place before the Competent Authority hereafter. There will be no orders as to costs. Petition allowed