S. R. Singh, J. - (1.) This bunch of 108 writ petitions-one filed by Shree Arya Dharm Sewa Sangh Birla Mills, Sabzi Mandi, Delhi (in Short the Trust) and others by State of U.P. may conveniently be disposed of by a common order in that the causes of action giving rise to these petitions are exactly similar/identical and same questions of law are involved in these writ petitions. It is not disputed that in proceeding for determination of surplus land, if any, held by the Trust, the prescribed authority, vide its order dated 22-11 -1974, had held that the Trust was entitled to be exempted under Section 6(f) of the U. P. imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (in short the Ceiling Act) and provisional notice dated 2-3-1974 issued to the Trust for determination of surplus land as tenure holder was dropped vide order dated 22-11-1974 on the finding that the Trust was created before the prescribed date i.e. 1-5-1959 wholly for charitable purposes and its income was being utilised for such purposes.
(2.) For the convenience it may be stated that writ petition No. 1682 of 1987 has been filed by Shree Arya Dharm Sewa Sangh, Birla Mills, Sabzi Mandi, Delhi against the notice dated 3.1-10-1986 under Section 9(2) read with Sections 29/30 of the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, whereby the Manager, Arya Dharm Sewa Sangh Trust, Haripar Kalan, Dehradun was called upon to show cause, within 15 days, as to how much total area of land was held by the Trust at the time of commencement of the Act and how much area had been transferred by it in favour of individuals, The notice was also called upon to disclose how much area remained with it on the date of notice, so that fresh proceeding under the Ceiling Act be initiated, if necessary against the Trust. Writ petition No. 17997 of 1987 and other connected writ petitions mentioned herein above have been filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the identically worded separate appellate orders dated 4-3-1987 whereby the Divisional Commissioner has allowed the appeals preferred by different transferees of the Trust afore stated against identically worded separate orders passed by the prescribed Authority (Ceiling) under Section 6(2) of the Act. It appears that an area of 62.01 acres was transferred by means of different sale deeds executed by the Trust (tenure holder) in favour of various persons between 6-3-1972 and 20-8-1974 (both dates inclusive) and 0.27 acre by sale deed dated 13-2-1976 as per statement made by Sri K. N. Tripati learned counsel appearing for the Trust and its vendees. Orders in respect of some transfers were passed by the prescribed Authority while in respect of others the proceedings were stayed as a result of stay order dated 24-3-1987 passed by this Court on application for interim relief moved in writ petition no. 1682 of 1987. Orders already passed under Section 6(2; of the Act were, however, reversed by the appellate authority vide separate but identical orders dated 4-3-1987 which orders are under challenge in writ petitions filed by the State of U. P. .
(3.) The Divisional Commissioner has taken the view that sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Act does not have retrospective effect and hence the sale deeds executed without prior per mission were not void and consequently the land covered by the sale deeds would not be deemed to be surplus.;