SHISHIR KUMAR, J. - (1.) BY means of this writ petition the petitioner-State has approached this Court for quashing the orders dated 23.8.1995 passed by respondent No. 1, Annexure-4 to the writ petition and order dated 11.4.1994 passed by respondent No. 2, Anneuxre-3 to the writ petition.
(2.) THE facts as stated by the petitioner in the present writ petition are that proceedings under the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act (for short the Act) were initiated against respondent No. 3 and a notice under Section 10 (2) of the Act was given on 19.8.1991 proposing an area of 30.7.4 Bighas of land as surplus. An objection was filed by respondent No. 3 stating therein that Chak No. 29 belongs to Thakur Ji Laxmi Narain and the land of Khata No. 69 belongs to Khata of Mahavir Ji, therefore, clubbing the aforesaid land in the Khata of holding of respondent is illegal and that cannot be done. Respondent No. 3 is only manager of the trust in the name of Thakur Laxmi Maharaj and Mahavir Ji. It was also stated in the objection filed by respondent No. 3 that in the year 1975, the respondent received a notice as manager of trust. A case was initiated which was numbered as Case No. 64 of 1975. The matter was decided against respondent by the Prescribed Authority. Then an appeal was preferred which was allowed vide its order dated 30.3.1977 and the notice was discharged. The Prescribed Authority on the basis of the objection decided the case vide order dated 11.4.1994 holding therein that as the second notice is not maintainable and the matter has already been finalised, therefore, the notice given subsequently is hereby discharged and the objection of respondent No. 3 was allowed. The said order was passed on 11.4.1994. The petitioner aggrieved by the aforesaid order filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Varanasi Division and the appeal has been dismissed. Hence the present writ petition.
(3.) THE learned Standing Counsel submits that the points raised on behalf of the petitioner has not been considered by both the Courts below and the appeal filed by the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the subsequent notice is not maintainable. A finding to this effect has been recorded by the appellate authority that proceeding has become final is not correct.;