CHANDBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-1995-4-17
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on April 25,1995

CHANDBIR SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) PARITOSH K. Mukherjee, J. This writ petition is listed for admission. How ever, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is being finally disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Rules of Court.
(2.) THE impugned judgment and orders are in Hindi. Sri J. N. Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner has taken pains in translating them in English for the convenience of the Court. The brief facts of the case are that proceedings was initiated against father of the petitioner, namely, late Chandra Pal Singh as far back as in 1976. In the aforesaid proceedings, an area of 4 Bigha, 17 Biswas comprising plot Nos. 21 and 651, in village Khataula Pargana Baghra, Tahsil and District Muzaffarnagar was declared surplus by the Prescribed Authority by his order dated March 25, Thereupon, a partition suit was filed before Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Tahsil Sardhana, District Meerut for partition of the land, including the land comprising of plot Nos. 21 and 651 of village Khataula, under Section 176 of the U. P. Zammdan and Land Reforms Act. The aforesaid suit was decreed by judgment dated August 27, 1986. Thereafter, an application was moved by S/sri Dharmendra Pratap and Vikram Singh under Section 12-A (d), read with Section 13-A of the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), before the Prescribed Authority, Sardhana.
(3.) THE Prescribed Authority, by his order dated July 31, 1984, held that land of 4 Bigha and 17 Biswas situated in village Dasrathpur, belonging to late Uiandrapal Singh, father of the petitioner, was surplus. Appeal preferred against the aforesaid order as dismissed by District Judge on March 23, 1988 holding that the land declared as 'surplus' can be changed in the view of provisions contained in Section 12-A of the Act as there had been a partition of land. Aggrieved, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, by means of the present writ petition.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.