JAI RAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition arises out of the proceedings under the Imposition of Celling on Land Holdings Act. The petitioner was issued the usual notice under Section 10 (2) of the said Act. He filed his objections and the Prescribed Authority rejected the objections. In the lower appellate court, however, the petitioner partly succeeded and the surplus area was reduced from 2.72 acres of irrigated land to 1.69 acres of such land. The petitioner has now come up in the instant petition and his learned counsel, Sri Girdhar Malviya, has pressed before me two contentions. Firstly, he contended that the statement in the lower appellate court's order that the point about irrigation was not pressed in the said court is not correct. The lower appellate court in its order observed :

(2.) THE second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the lower appellate court was wrong in granting relief in respect of plot No. 32 only to the extent of 1.13 biswas. He says that in fact the declaration under Section 143 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act was for the areas of two bighas and thirteen biswas and, therefore, the lower appellate court should have excluded two bighas 13 biswas from plot No. 32 and not only 1.13 biswas or 1.03 acres. Learned counsel's contention is that the declaration was binding on the Prescribed Authority and even though it was granted on 20th August, 1974, still, it was in subsistance at the relevant period when the question of surplus was considered by the Prescribed Authority. In this connection Section 6 (1) (a) has been relied on. THE said provision lays down as under :-

(3.) I wish to make it clear that I do not suggest that it is not open to the Legislature to lay down that despite the material date as laid down in Section 5 (1) as being the date of the commencement of the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings (Amendment) Act, 1972, certain specified developments which may take place after the said date will be taken into consideration for determining the ceiling area and the surplus at the time when such determination is done by the Prescribed Authority. In this connection attention may be drawn to the second paragraph of Section 4-A of the Act which deals with the determination of irrigated land. The said para is as follows :