K.P.Singh, J. - (1.) THE writ petition arises out of proceeding under Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972. The aforesaid Act shall be referred to as U.P. Act No. 22 of 1972 hereafter. Necessary facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the disputed land was tenancy of Smt. Kamlabai. Since under the provisions of U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act the disputed land was declared as surplus, the State of U.P. succeeded in getting possession over the disputed land in the year 1963. Thereafter the present petitioner filed a suit under Section 229B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and land Reforms Act against the State of U.P. That suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner in the year 1965. In the year 1975 proceedings under Section 5 of the U.P. Act No. 22 of 1972 have been initiated against the petitioner. The Prescribed Authority as well as the appellate court have negatived the claim of the petitioner. Aggrieved by their judgments the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner contends before me that the occupation of the petitioner over the disputed land is not unauthorised hence the proceedings against him are wholly unwarranted and his eviction from the disputed land as ordered by the courts below is patently illegal and without jurisdiction. The learned counsel for the State has tried to support the impugned judgments. According to him when the State of U.P. succeeded in getting possession over the disputed land under the provisions of U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act the revenue court could not decree the petitioner's claim in the suit under Section 229B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, hence the prescribed Authority and the appellate court were fully justified in negativing the claim of the petitioner.
(3.) I have considered the contentions raised on behalf of the parties. Unauthorised occupation has teen defined in Section 2(g) of U.P. Act No. 22 of 1972 as below: - - 'Unauthorised occupation', in relation to any public premises, means the occupation by any person of the public premises without authority for such occupation, and includes the continuance in occupation by any person of the public premises after the authority (whether by way of grant of any other mode of transfer) under which or the capacity in which he was allowed to hold or occupy the premises has expired or has been determined for any reason whatsoever and also includes continuance in occupation in the circumstances specified in sub -section (1) of Section 7, and a person shall not, merely by reason of the fact that he had paid any amount as rent, be deemed to be in authorised occupation.;