JUDGMENT

Lakshmi Prasad, J. - This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The disputed sirdari holding of the petitioner was sold for the realisation of certain dues of the Gaon Sabha realisable as arrears of land revenue as provided under Section 225 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, notwithstanding the petitioner's objection that his sirdari holding could not be sold for the realisation of such clues. Aggrieved by the order of the Sale Officer the petitioner went in appeal which was allowed. Then opposite party No. 1 went in revision before the Board of Revenue, opposite party No. 2. The said revision was allowed and the Board of Revenue took the view that it was permissible under the provisions of sub-sec. (2) of Section 286 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act to sell a sirdari holding for the realisation of sums of money recoverable as land revenue. It is in these circumstances that the present petition is filed with a prayer that the impugned order dated the 30th of May, 1966, passed by the Board of Revenue be quashed.

2. The petition is opposed by the opposite parties. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Junior Standing Counsel.

3. Under Section 153 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act it is provided that except as expressly permitted by the Act, the interest of a sirdar shall not be transferable. Then we have Section 279 to say that an arrear of land revenue may be recovered by any one or more of the processes enumerated in clauses (a) to (f) thereof. Under clauses (d) and (e) of Section 279 it is provided that the arrears of land revenue may be realised by attachment of the holding in respect of which the arrear is due as also by sale of the holding in respect of which the arrear is due. Section 286 consists of two sub-sections. In order to appreciate the import of the provisions contained in Section 286 it may better be reproduced in full :

"286 (1) If any arrears of land revenue Cannot be recovered by any of the processes mentioned in clauses (a) to (e) of Section 279, the Collector may realise the same from the interest of defaulter in any other immovable property of the defaulter as if the said arrears were arrears of land revenue assessed on and clue in respect of such other property.

(2) Sums of money recoverable as arrears of land revenue but not due in respect of any specific land, may be recovered under this section from any immovable property of the defaulter."

4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the provision in Section 286 (2) for the realisation of sums of money recoverable as arrears of land revenue by sale of any immovable property of the defaulter refers to the immovable property in which the defaulter has saleable interest and the expression "any immovable property" occurring in Section 286 (2) cannot be taken to include even the sirdari holding in which the defaulter has no saleable interest. As against that, the contention of the learned Junior Standing Counsel is that Section 153 of the Act prohibits only a voluntary transfer by the sirdar and has nothing to do with an involuntary transfer. In the alternative he maintains that the interpretation placed by the Board of Revenue on Section 286 (2) is correct. In my view neither of these contentions raised by the learned Junior Standing Counsel is correct and can be accepted. A plain reading of Section 153 (1) clearly shows that it provides that the interest of a sirdar shall not be transferable except as expressly permitted by the provisions of the Act itself. The expression "shall not be transferable" occurring in Section 153 (1) is wide enough to cover both voluntary and involuntary transfers. Acceptance of the contention advanced by the learned Standing Counsel in this behalf would lead to absurd results, in so far as in that case it would be open to any judgment creditor to attach and sell sir holding of his judgment-debtor