(1.) HAVING been served with a notice under Section 10 (2) of the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the petitioner filed an objection inter alia asserting that plot Nos. 31, 296, 315, 15 and 157 were grove plots and should be treated as such in determining the ceiling area. The Prescribed Authority by its order dated 31st October, 1974 repelled the aforesaid plea raised by the petitioner. In regard to Plot Nos. 296, 315, 15 and 157 the Prescribed Authority took the view that even though these plots were recorded as groves it was apparent from the report of the Naib Tehsildar dated 12th October, 1974, that there were no trees on the spot and the land was under cultivation. Subsequently an application was made by the petitioner for review In respect of these four plots which was allowed by the Prescribed Authority on 9th December, 1974. In this order the Prescribed Authority took the view that since the report of the Naib Tehsildar was contrary to the entries in the village records it could not be accepted. Still an appeal was filed by the petitioner before the District Judge. A cross-objection was filed by the State in respect of plot Nos. 296, 315, 15 and 157 on the ground that no case for review had been made out and the order dated 9th December, 1974, was liable to be set aside. The appeal was heard by the Additional Civil Judge, Bulandshahar, and was dismissed on 10th May, 1975. By the same order the cross-objection filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh was, however, allowed and on the view that no case for review had been (sic) the order of the Prescribed Authority dated 9th December, 1974, was set aside and its order dated 31st October, 1974, was restored. Aggrieved the petitioner has instituted this writ petition.
(2.) IT was urged by counsel for the petitioner that the Prescribed Authority in its earlier order dated 31st October, 1974, had committed an apparent mistake in placing reliance on the report of the Naib Tehsildar dated 12th October, 1974, and ignoring the entries in village records and on this mistake being brought to its notice the said authority had rightly corrected the apparent mistake by its order dated 9th December, 1974. On the other hand it was urged by the learned Standing Counsel that if the aforesaid plots have lost their character as grove land as contemplated by Section 29 of the Act, even if a declaration had earlier been made it was Incumbent on the Prescribed Authority to redetermine the ceiling area and since in view of the report of the Naib Tehsildar it was apparent that these plots had lost their character as groves the order of review was illegal and had rightly been set aside by the Additional Civil Judge.
(3.) IN view of the foregoing discussion the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order of the Additional Civil Judge dated 10th May, 1975, is quashed and he is directed to decide the appeal afresh in accordance with law keeping in mind the observations made above. IN the circumstances of the case the parties will bear their own costs. The order of stay is vacated. Petition allowed.