Dhatri Saran Mathur, J. - (1.) This is an appeal by Ram Krishna against the order dated 22 -1 -1970 of the II Addl. District Judge of Kanpur returning the memorandum of appeal for presentation to a proper court. The material facts of the case are that Ram Krishna, appellant, is a resident of Bilhaur, district Kanpur, and had his agricultural holdings in both districts Kanpur and Unnao. When proceedings were taken under the UP Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) his land situate in District Unnao, and no part of the land situate in District Kanpur, was declared surplus land. Thereafter steps for preparation of the Compensation Assessment Roll were taken by the Compensation Officer of Tehsil Bilhaur, District Kanpur, and the appellant feeling aggrieved preferred an appeal against the order passed by the Compensation Officer u/S. 20 (or 21) of the above Act.
(2.) The learned District Judge expressed the opinion that the expression "land or any part thereof" used in these Ss. means the surplus land and, therefore, the appeal lay to the District Judge of Unnao and not to the District Judge of Kanpur.
(3.) A perusal of the various provisions of the Act shall make it clear that the steps taken at the various stages are for determination of the surplus land of the tenure holder and for payment of compensation in respect of the land declared to be surplus land. S. 9 contemplates a general notice calling upon every tenure holder holding land in excess of the ceiling area applicable to him to submit a statement in respect of all his holdings. In the end the Prescribed Authority determines the surplus land of the tenure holder. This order is appealable to the District Judge u/S. 13(1) of the Act. The appeal lies to the District Judge within whose jurisdiction the land or any part thereof is situate.;