AMAR BAHADUR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. U. Khan, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) CEILING proceedings under Section 10 (2) of U. P. Imposition of CEILING on Land Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as CEILING Act) were initiated against Hub Lal respondent No. 4. By order dated 6-9-1976, prescribed authority declared an area of 30 Bigha 13 Biswa agricultural land as surplus land. In appeal the said order was substantially maintained and the surplus area declared by the prescribed authority was reduced only by four biswa and four biswancies. Thereafter consequent order was passed by the prescribed authority on 3-11-1979. On 26-7-1980, petitioner Nos. 5 and 6 Gyan Bahadur Singh and Bal Krishna Singh filed objections under Section 11 (2) of the CEILINGs Act claiming that half of the land treated to be of respondent No. 4 by CEILING authority belonged to them. Similar objections were filed on 8-8-1980 by petitioner Nos. 1 to 4. The Objections were rejected as being barred by time however appellate Court reversed the said order and remanded the matter to prescribed authority to decide the objections on merit. Prescribed authority on 23-11-1981 rejected the objections against which appeal was filed by the petitioners being Revenue (CEILING) Appeal No. 881 of 1981. VII A. D. J. , Allahabad through judgment and order dated 8-11-1983 set-aside the order of prescribed authority and remanded the matter to the prescribed authority who again on 16-1-1985 rejected the objections of petitioners hence another appeal being Revenue Appeal No. 70/9/86 was filed. By that time jurisdiction to hear ceiling appeals had been conferred upon the Commissioner/additional Commissioner instead of District Judge/additional District Judge. Additional Commissioner, Allahabad Division Allahabad allowed the appeal on 20-1-1987 and again matter was remand to the prescribed authority. Additional Commissioner held that the earlier order of remand dated 8-11-1983 had not been complied with by the prescribed authority. The said order of Additional Commissioner is Annexure 2 to the writ petition. Thereafter again prescribed authority/additional Collector Allahabad through order dated 15-9-1988 rejected the objections of the petitioners. Fourth time appeal was filed by the petitioners being CEILING Appeal No. 2/88. This time Commissioner, Allahabad Division Allahabad dismissed the appeal on 24-2- 1990, hence this writ petition.

(3.) IT appears that the order of S. O. C. was not filed.