( 1 ) THIS case has been referred by Mithan Lal, J. , to a larger bench for decision of the following questions :"

( 2 ) DID the appellants become adhivasis of the disputed land under the provisions of Section 20 (a) (ii) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act from the commencement of the said Act and then became sirdars after proceedings under Chapter IX-A of the said Act?

( 3 ) ALTERNATIVELY have the appellants become adhivasis under Section 20 (b) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and thereafter sirdars under Chapter IX-A of the said Act?

( 4 ) WHETHER even if the defendants-appellants became adhivasis are they liable to be ejected under section 231 as they cannot be deemed to have held the land within the meaning of Section 240-A?" question No. 1, which is "1. Whether notwithstanding the expiry of the term of quabuliat on 13-5-1951 the defendants appellants continued to be the sub-tenants of the plots in suit till the commencement of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act because (a) of the enforcement of Section 295-A U. P. Tenancy Act, till 6/7th June, 1952, and (b) the sub-tenancy has not been extinguished as required by the provision

Click Here to Read the rest of this document