S.U.KHAN, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) MUSAMMAT Veeren Kunwar was a big tenure holder. She mortgaged part of her agricultural land comprised in Plot No. 153 area about 50 bighas with Punjab National Bank. The area of the land mortgaged is 49 bigha 13 biswa 6 biswansis and 10 kachwansis (about 50 bigha) comprised in Plot No. 153, Khata No. 65 Village Paharpur Tehsil Anupshahr district Bulandshahr (para 4 of the writ petition). The mortgage was without possession hence there was no question of inclusion of the name of the Bank in the revenue records. Proceedings for declaration of surplus land under U.P. Imposition of Ceiling On Land Holdings Act, 1900 were initiated against Smt. Veeren Kunwar. About 55 bigha land belonging to her was declared as surplus land. Thereafter she gave the choice of the land to be taken as surplus land and mentioned in the said choice that the land of Plot No. 153 might be taken as surplus land (this land she had already mortgaged with the bank). When bank came to know about these proceedings, it filed application under Section 13A of the Ceiling Act before the prescribed authority under Ceiling Act of Tehsil Anupshahr, district Bulandshahr in Case No. 158. The matter was decided by the prescribed authority against the Bank on 6.10.1980. The prescribed authority held that according to the report of the Tehsil, if the land in dispute was not taken as surplus land then there would be no land available to the tenure holder Smt Veeren Kunwar as all other land had been sold by her. Against order dated 6.10.1980, petitioner bank filed Appeal No. 30 of 1985 -86. Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division Meerut through judgment and order dated 24.7.1986, dismissed the appeal hence, this writ petition. It has been stated in para 5 of the writ petition that for recovery of its amount, petitioner bank commenced recovery proceedings against Smt. Veeren Kunwar under Section 11 of the U.P. Agricultural Credit Act, 1973 and an order/decree was passed on 13.2.1975 in favour of the Bank. However, the said order/decree could not be executed as District Magistrate reported that the mortgaged land had been taken as surplus land. Thereafter petitioner Bank filed objections before prescribed authority under the Ceiling Act which were rejected by above orders.
(3.) THE case of the petitioner is based upon Section 12A(c) of the Ceiling Act, which is quoted below: (c) where any person holds land in excess of the ceiling area including any land mortgaged to the State Government or to a (bank as defined in Clause (c) of Section 2 of the Uttar Pradesh Agricultural Credit Act, 1973) or to a cooperative land development bank or other co -operative society or to the Corporation or to a Government Company, the surplus, land to be determined shall, as far as possible, be land other than that so mortgaged; ;