- (1.) D. K. Seth, J. In this case the petitioners had made an application under Sec tion 11 (2) of U. P. Imposition of Ceiling of Land Holdings Act, 1960. The said application was decided against the petitioners by an order dated 29- 5-1995. The petitioners preferred an appeal against the said order under Section 13 of the said Act, being Ceiling Appeal No. 28/3/m/1995. The said appeal is still pending. The petitioners had made application for stay of the operation of order dated 29-5-1995 and/or restraining the petitioners from dispossessing the petitioners pursuant to the said order. But the said application has yet not been disposed of. On the other hand the Collector, Maharajganj, is attempting to obtain possession, pursuant to the order dated 29-5-1995.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners Sri P. K. Misra, submits that the respon dents No. 4, 5 and 6 had also made an application under Section 11 (2) of the Act and their case was also decided against them. The said respondents do not have any interest adverse to that of the petitioners in the present case. Section 14 of the said Act provides in sub-section (1) as follows : "14. Acquisition of surplus land- (1) The Collector shall at any time after- (a) in case, whether the order passed under sub-section (1) of Section 11 has become final, the date of its so becoming final; or (b) in case, where no appeal has been preferred under Section 13, the date of expiry of the period of limitation provided therefor; or (c) in case, where an appeal has been preferred under Section 13, the date of its decision, take possession of the surplus land determined under Section 11, Section 12 or Section 13 and also of any ungathered crop or fruits of trees, not being crops or fruits to which sub-section (1) of Section 15 applies, after evicting any person found in occupation of such land, crops or fruits and may for that purpose use or cause to be used such force as may be necessary. " A plain reading of the above provision shows that even if there is an order for taking possession by the Collector even then no possession can be taken until the appeal under Section 13 of the Act is decided. Sub-section (1) of S. 14 of the Act clearly lays down that the possession shall be taken only after, (a) the order under Section 11 (1) has become final, namely after the date of its becoming final, (b) in case, where no appeal has been preferred under Section 13 after the expiry of the period of limitation provided for preferring the appeal, or (c) in case, where an appeal has been preferred under S. 13 only after the date of decision in the appeal.
(3.) THERE cannot be any scope of two interpretations of the said provision. It is a statutory mandate on the Collector with regard to taking over possession in respect of the surplus land, which prohibits taking over possession on the condi tions enumerated in the said section. THEREfore, even in the absence of any applica tion of stay such order for taking over possession, cannot be implemented. So far as the view with regard to interpretation of Section 14 (1) (c) of the Act, which I have taken, is also supported by the judgment dated 20-4-1995 passed in Writ Petition No. 10440 of 1995, in which Hon. B. Dikshit, J. had taken the same view, "even if stay application was not moved, cannot direct taking over possession till the appeal is finally disposed of. ";