LAL CHAND Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition arises out of the proceedings under the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are these. The three Petitioners before me claim that they are the sons of one Lala Ratan Lal and they became Bhumidhars of the plots detailed in para 2 of the petition. It is claimed that on the basis of the family settlement, the father became the Bhumidhar of the said plots and the said father died on 21st May, 1971, and thereafter, the Petitioners became the Bhumidhars of the above mentioned plots. In para 4 of the petition it is said that the names of the Petitioners were mutated by the Sub-Divisional Officer on 24th August, 1973 in regard of the said plots. A true copy of the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer dated 24-10-1973 is annexed to the petition as Annexure 2. It is claimed that in this view of the matter the Petitioners should also have been issued the notice under the first proviso to rule 8 of the Rules framed under the Act. The notice under Section 10 (2) of the Act was issued to the late Lala Bishan Lal, father of the Respondent No. 4. The learned Counsel placed reliance on the Full Bench decision in Shantanu Kumar v. State of U.P., 1979 AWC 585. In view, this contention cannot be accepted. In Shantanu Kumar's case it will be seen that the name of the Petitioner had been recorded in 1972 i.e. in 1379F. The Full Bench emphasised this aspect of the matter by observing:

(3.) In the instant case, on the own admission of the Petitioners, their names were recorded after 8th June, 1973 which is the relevant date under section 5 (1) of the Act. It should be seen that the head note of the heading of C. L. H. Form 3 is as follows: