Hari Swarup, J. - (1.) THESE appeals have been filed by the Municipal Board Ghaziabad and by the State of U. P. against the judgment of a learned Single Judge al lowing the writ petition filed by respondent No. 1. By his judgment the learned Single Judge has held that the land in dispute had not vested in the State Government under the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and that consequently the State Government could not have by a noti fication issued under Section 117-A of the Act vested it in the Municipal Board, Ghazia bad.
(2.) IT appears that some land includ ing plot No. 582 of village Bhojna, Pergana Loni, Ghaziabad, district Meerut, was ac quired for the North Western Railway. Some of the land acquired was found to be surplus to the requirements of the Railway and was sold by auction on March 15, 1943, through the Land Acquisition officer, Gha ziabad. Sri Mukand Lal, father of Seth Jai Prakash who had filed the writ petition, purchased an area of 48.13 acres including plot No. 582. Since the purchase of plot No. 582 it was used by Sri Mukand Lal and after him by his son for running a brick kiln. Shri Mukand Lal died on October 14, 1952. In November, 1954, Seth Jai Prakash leased out plot No. 582 to Sri Nand Kishore on a rental of Rs. 800.00 per annum. Sri Nand Kishore also used the land for running the brick kiln. After the death of Sri Nand Kishore in or about 1958, his son Sri Shanti Swarup succeeded him and became the lessee. On October 11, 1952, the State Government issued a notification under Sec tion 117 of the Act vesting certain kinds of land situate in village Bhojna in the Gaon Samaj Bhojna. Plot No. 582 was, however, not included by the Gaon Samaj in the list of land vested in it. By a subsequent noti fication dated October 11, 1954, issued under Section 117-A of Act, the State Government declared, inter alia, that certain land in vil lage Bhojna shall vest in the Municipal Board, Ghaziabad. Under the notification the Municipal Board treated the plot No. 582 of village Bhojna to have been vested in it. Sometime in 1958 the Municipal Board made an application under Rule 115-C of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules for the eviction of Sri Nand Kishore from plot No. 582 on the ground that the plot had vested in the Municipal Board and that Sri Nand Kishore had made unauthoris ed encroachment thereon. Sri Nand Kishore having died his son Sri Shanti Swarup con tested the application. By an order dated September 29, 1958, the Assistant Collector held that Sri Shanti Swarup was a licensee and could not be evicted. 'He, however, ordered Sri Shanti Swarup to pay Rs. 800.00per annum to the Municipal Board from November, 1954 till he continued to run the brick kiln. Seth Jai Prakash, who was owner of the plot, was not impleaded in these proceedings. After this order Sri Shanti Swarup wrote to Seth Jai Prakash informing him that he will not be paying any amount towards the rent of the plot to him and requested him to return the amounts already paid by him. Thereupon Seth Jai Prakash filed this writ petition. In this writ petition he challenged the validity of the notification dated August 11, 1954, under Section 117-A of the Act and of the order dated September 29, 1958, under Rule 115-C on the ground that the Act did not apply to the land in dispute.
(3.) THE learned single Judge held:- (i) that the plot in dispute was not an estate or part of an estate, that Seth Jai Prakash was not an intermediary and that the Zamindari Abolition Act was, therefore, not applicable; (ii) that the plot in dispute formed part of land acquired under the Land Acquisi tion Act, 1894 and that to such land the Zamindari Abolition Act did not apply, as no notification had been issued under sub section (3) of Section 1 of the Act; and (iii) that the order under Rule 115-C was illegal and without jurisdiction. On these findings the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition, quashed the order under Rule 115-C and directed the Munici pal Board and the State Government not to act in respect of the plot in dispute under the notification under Section 117-A of the Zamindari Abolition Act. Against the judg ment of the learned Single Judge the State Government and the Municipal Board have filed these two appeals. The judgment and the findings of the learned Single Judge, re ferred to above, have been challenged by both the appellants. ;