GOVIND NARAIN VARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) V. C. Misra, J. Sri V. K. S. Chaudhary learned Senior Advocate as sisted by Sri Kunal Ravi Singh and Sri R. S. Maurya, Advocates on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents are present.

(2.) BOTH the above said writ petitions being identical in nature with common reliefs and grounds against the same impugned orders dated 30. 4. 1992 and 12. 8. 1992 are being decided together by this Judgment. BOTH the writ petitions have been filed from the orders of Prescribed Authority and Commissioner in proceeding under the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (here inafter referred to as the Act) by which all the four brothers have been treated as one tenure holder a'nd their agricultural holdings have been clubbed together and declared surplus being beyond the ceiling limit.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner also urged that the fresh notices, if any, could be given to the sons of Sri Brij Narain Verma for determination of surplus land under the Ceiling Act under the proviso to Rule 8 of the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Rules framed under the Act as their names had already been recorded before the relevant date in the records in pursuance of the family settlement and since notice was sent to Sri Brij Narain Verma and was the only tenure holder proceeded against the surplus land with him over and above his ceiling limit had to be only determined as on 8. 6. 1973 on the basis that h,e had 16th share only in the holding. It has been further submitted that under Section 10 (2) of the Act notice was issued and in the opinion of Prescribed Authority there was some surplus land beyond the ceiling limit with the tenure holder Sri Brij Narain Verma who had only 1/6* share (vide Section 10 (1) of the Act) and in view of the findings recorded earlier nothing was done in the matter after the Judgment of the appellate authority dated 21. 2. 1984 and thus, there was no surplus land.