AUTAR SINGH Vs. U P STATE THROUGH COLLECTOR, NAINITAL
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
U P State Through Collector, Nainital
Click here to view full judgement.
B.S.VERMA, J. -
(1.) BY means of this petition the petitioners have sought a writ in
the nature of certiorari quashing the orders contained in Annexure Nos. 1
and 2 to the writ petition passed by Commissioner Kumaun Division and the
Prescribed Authority/Upper Zila Adhikari Nainital respectively.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case giving rise to the writ petition are that a notice U/S 10(2) of U.P. Imposition of Ceiling On
Land Holdings Act, 1960, was served upon petitioner No.1 Autar Singh on
19 -1 -1989, who had filed the objection on 13 -2 -1989 that he is Bhumidhar of Khata No.2 area 139 Bighas and 13 Biswa and on the land of Khata No.
38 area 76 Bighas 16 Biswa, Smt. Ratan Kaur widow of late Sri Santa Singh was recorded tenure holder. The said Smt. Ratan Kaur had adopted the
petitioner No.2 Lakhmir Singh, who was natural son of petitioner No.1
Autar Singh. It was further alleged in the objection that after the death
of Smt. Ratan Kaur, Lakhmir Singh became the owner of the land of Smt.
Ratan Kaur and the land of Lakhmir Singh inherited by him from Smt. Ratan
Kaur has wrongly been clubbed with the land of petitioner No.1 Autar
Singh, since Lakhmir Singh is no longer member of the family of Autar
Singh. It was further alleged in the objection that since late Smt. Ratan
Kaur was not having son from her husband late Sri Santa Singh, therefore
she adopted petitioner No.2 and also executed a will on 4.1.1982 in
favour of her adopted son. This fact has also been mentioned specifically
in the will that the will is being executed in favour of her adopted son.
It was also mentioned in the will that in the life time of her husband
Santa Singh was also willing to adopt the son of Autar Singh, but
unfortunately he had died therefore Smt. Ratan Kaur had adopted
petitioner No.2 and executed the will in his favour.
(3.) THE objections were rejected by the Prescribed Authority and treated minor Lakhmir Singh son of Autar Singh and clubbed the land of
Autar Singh and Lakhmir Singh and the land mentioned in the impugned
order dated 24 -10 -1989, was made surplus.
Aggrieved by the order passed by the Prescribed Authority, the appeal was preferred before the Commissioner Kumaun Division Nainital.
The learned Commissioner did not find favour to the petitioner No.1 and
dismissed the appeal vide impugned order dated 31.3.1990, on the ground
that adoption of Lakhmir Singh by Late Smt. Ratan Kaur was not proved by
documentary evidence and in the will there is no mention that any
adoption deed was ever executed and since Lakhmir Singh is a minor son of
Autar Singh and Autar Singh is cultivating the land in the name of minor
Lakhmir Singh, therefore the land in the name of Lakhmir Singh and Autar
Singh have rightly been clubbed together and found surplus by the
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.