- (1.) PARITOSH K. Mukherjee, J. Ashok Kumar Saxena and four others have moved this writ petition, inter alia, praying for is suance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents-authorities net to disturb the possession of the petitioners over the land in dispute on the basis of notification dated 9-1-1991, and, a writ of certiorari, quashing the impugned notification dated 9-1-1991, which is contained in Annexure 11 to the Writ petition.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts, as narrated in the writ petition, are that the controversy involved in the present case relates to an area of 0. 40 acres of land of plot No. 211, situated in village Jungle Salik Ram, Tappa Khuthar, Pargana Haveli, Tehsil Sadar, dis trict Gorakhpur. Plot No. 211 has total area of 3 acres, 1 decimal of land. It belonged to one Jokhan son of Ram Ratan. In the proceedings for determination of surplus land under the provisions of U. P. Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the Prescribed Authority, by his order dated 20-2-1981 declared 25105. 30 sq. meters of land, held by Jokhan, as surplus. He accordingly adjusted an area of 12181. 47 sq. meters of land out of plot No. 211 against the surplus land. Thus, accord ing to the was 3 acres and 1 decimal, even after adjustment of an area of 12181. 47 sq. meters, an area of 2386. 93 was left out, within the ceiling limit, even under the aforesaid order of the Prescribed Authority dated 20-2-1981. Consequent upon passing of the aforesaid order, dated 20-2-1981, after ob taining choice of Jokhan, the Prescribed Authority excluded an area of 40 decimal out of plot No. 211 from surplus area. Therefore, the total area of 12181. 47 sq. meters, which had been taken out of plot No. 211 as surplus, was reduced by 1936 sq. yards. Therefore, according to the petitioners, the total area of plot No. 211, determined by the Prescribed Authority, was well within the ceiling limit.
(3.) IT is further case of the petitioners that when the aforesaid order was passed neither notification under Section 10, nor notification under Section 10 (3) were is sued. Therefore, no portion of plot No. 211 could be deemed to have been vested in the State Government. Thereafter, on the notice given by Sri Jokhan, under Section 26 of the Act, the Prescribed Authority issued a certificate on 10-8-1987 to the effect that the State had no objection to the proposed transfer. In pur suance of the aforesaid certificate, Jokhan transferred various portions of plot No. 211 by means of 5 sale deeds in favour of dif ferent petitioners of the present writ peti tion.;