Mahesh Prasad Mehrotra, J. - (1.) THIS petition arises out of the proceedings under the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act. It seems that a fresh notice under Section 10(2) of the Act was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner filed objections. On 10.10.1980 the petitioner moved an application praying that the subsequent ceiling proceedings were not maintainable and they should be set aside. The Prescribed Authority by his order dated 1.11.80 rejected the said prayer and held that the subsequent ceiling proceedings were maintainable. A true copy of petition. Against the said order the petitioner Shiv Shanker filed an appeal and the same was dismissed on the ground that it was not maintainable in law. The appellate Court's judgment is dated 7.8.81 and a true copy of the same is annexure 4 to the petition. A certified copy of the said judgment is also on record. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has now come up in the instant writ petition and in support thereof, I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) IN my opinion, the impugned appellate judgment has correctly held that no appeal lay under Section 13 or Section 13A of the Act against the order of the Prescribed Authority holding that the proceedings were maintainable. The appellate Court has rightly observed that there is no provision for appeal against an order which merely decided one of the issues involved whether the subsequent proceedings under the Ceiling Act were or were not maintainable. Such an order is not the kind of the order against which an appeal has been prescribed under Sec. 13(1) or under Section 13A of the Act. The petition accordingly fails and is dismissed but there will be no order as to costs.;