STATE OF U P Vs. VED PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. P. Srivastava, J. Heard the learned Counsel representing the petitioner.

(2.) PERUSED the record.

(3.) CONSIDERING the implications aris ing under the decision of this Court in the case of Dilbagh Singh v. State of U. P. , 1978 AWC 393, the respondent authority could very well go into the question of the extent of the tenurial rights claimed by the objec tors in the objections under Section 11 (2) of the Act while determining the extent of the surplus area of the recorded tenure-holder.