SHANKER LAL PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri D.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The question Involved in the present petition is about scope and interpretation of Section 13A of U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The undisputed facts are that the petitioner was served with a notice dated 10.12.1975 under Section 10 (2) of the Act proposing to declare an area of 4.13 acres in terms of irrigated land as surplus. The petitioner contested the notice by filing objection stating therein that bhumidhari land detailed in the statement in C.L.H. form 3 was 'sir Khudkast' and was inherited by him along with his brother Lachhi in equal shares. Lachhi executed a Will in his favour on the basis of which his name came to be recorded in the revenue record on the entire land after the death of Lachhi. It was stated that the said Will was subject-matter of Suit No. 23 of 1973 for cancellation and possession filed by Smt. Munni Devi w/o of deceased Lachhi which was decreed by the trial court on 9.1.1974 and Civil Appeal No. 107 of 1974 was pending, as such the said land was liable to be excluded from his holding. The prescribed authority vide order dated 15.6.1976 confirmed the notice and declared 4.13 acres in terms of irrigated land as surplus in the hands of the petitioner. Aggrieved the petitioner filed an appeal which was partly allowed and the case was remanded back to the prescribed authority to redetermine the ceiling area after treating certain plots as unirrigated and single crop producing land. In the meantime, Civil Appeal No. 107 of 1974 came to be dismissed on 19.8.1977 and the decree of the trial court cancelling the Will was confirmed. This judgment was not brought on record of the prescribed authority by the petitioner. The prescribed authority vide order dated 23.3.1979 recalculated the celling area in accordance with the direction of the appellate court and declared 1.16 acres in terms of irrigated land as surplus. No appeal was filed against this judgment and the same was allowed to become final.

(3.) Simultaneously, the consolidation proceedings were also going on wherein the old holding of the petitioner lost its identity and new plots were allotted in his chak. Since plot No. 535 a part of which was declared surplus by the prescribed authority vide order dated 23.3.1979 also changed hands during consolidation, consequently, an amended C.L.H. was issued to declare new plot No. 824 as surplus in place of old plot No. 535. This prompted the petitioner to move an application under Section 13A of the Act for redetermination of the ceiling area on the following grounds :