M.P.Mehrotra, J. - (1.) This petition arises out of the proceedings under the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960.
(2.) The facts, in brief, are these: The petitioner No. 1 was issued notice under Section 10 (2) and he filed objections. Objections were also filed by the petitioner No. 2 who is the mother of the petitioner No. 1. She claimed one-sixth share in the land measuring 14.85 acres. The Prescribed Authority decided the said objections. Thereafter an appeal was filed and the same was heard and decided by the Additional District Judge, Hamirpur. The appeal was dismissed. Now, the petitioner has come up in the instant petition and in support thereof I have heard Shri R. R. K. Trivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. In opposition, the learned Standing Counsel has made his submissions. Learned counsel pressed three contentions before me. Firstly, it was contended that the land has been wrongly treated as single crop land. Secondly, it was contended that the petitioner No. 2 Smt. Bhawani Bai, who is the mother of the petitioner Jagdamba Prasad, had one-sixth share in the land and the same was wrongly included in the holding of the petitioner No. 1. Thirdly, it was contended that there had been reduction of area in the consolidation proceedings and the authorities below erred in not giving effect to the same. I shall deal with these contentions in seriatim.
(3.) So far as the first contention is concerned, it should be seen that the Explanation to Section 4 of the Act provides as follows: "Explanation. - For the purposes of clause (ii), the expression 'single crop land means any unirrigated land capable of producing only one crop in an agricultural year in consequence of assured irrigation from any State irrigation work or private irrigation work.";