SUGHAR SINGH Vs. THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY AND OTHERS

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 petitioner was issued notice under Sec. 10 (2) of the Act and he filed objections. They were decided by the Prescribed Authority and certified copy of the order of the Prescribed Authority dated 29-5-1976 has been appended to the writ petition and marked as Annexure 1. Thereafter an appeal was filed and the same was dismissed by the Civil Judge, Jalaun at Orai by his Judgment dated Jan. 29, 1977 and a certified copy whereof has been annexed to the writ petition and marked as Annexure 2. Now the petitioner has come up in the instant writ petition and in support thereof I have heard Sri R. B. Mehrotra, learned counsel for the Petitioner and in opposition, the learned Standing Counsel has made submissions.

(3.) Sri Mehrotra, contended that the finding recorded by the Ceiling Authority in respect of the non-existence of a minor daughter on 8th June, 1973 was legally erroneous. The learned counsel in this connection contended that the certified copy of the Kutumbh Register should have been relied upon by the authorities below and that it was wrongly discarded on the ground that it was issued by the Pradhan of of the Gaon Sabha. Learned counsel contended that the certified copy under the rules was bound to be issued by the Pradhan and therefore, the same was no ground for discarding the probative value of the said document. Learned counsel next contended that the State merely relied on the statement of the Lekhpal, whose statement was ih the nature of hearsay. The learned counsel placed reliance on the following cases: