JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Pawan Giri, holding brief of Sri B.N.Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Amit Manohar, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents.

2. Challenge in the present petition is to an order dated 02.06.2008 passed by the Additional Commissioner(Administration), Vindhyachal Mandal, Mirzapur in Case No. 12/333 of 2007 (Ghurau Vs. Meghai) in proceedings under Section 27 (4) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling On Land Holdings Act, 1960 [the Ceiling Act], whereby the lease granted in favour of the petitioners has been cancelled and the land in question has been directed to be reverted to the State Government.

3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the lease had been granted to the petitioners after completion of the requisite procedural formalities and that the order impugned has been passed without giving proper opportunity to the petitioners and as such the same is legally unsustainable.

4. Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents has supported the order passed by the Additional Commissioner by stating that the petitioners did not belong to the category of persons eligible for allotment of the ceiling surplus land and accordingly the proceedings for cancellation of allotment were rightly initiated. Placing reliance upon the order-sheet of the case, a copy whereof has been annexed as annexure CA-1 to the counter affidavit filed by the State respondents, it is submitted that the order has been passed after due notice and opportunity to the petitioners and as such the same cannot be said to be arbitrary and illegal. It has also been pointed out that the land in question being not vacant at the relevant point of time the same could not have been allotted to the petitioners.

5. In order to appreciate the rival contentions the relevant statutory provisions may be adverted to.

6. The disposal and settlement of land declared surplus in proceedings under the Ceiling Act is provided for under Chapter IV thereof. For ease of reference, Section 27 of the Ceiling Act which pertains to the settlement of surplus land is being extracted below:-

“Section 27 - Settlement of surplus land - (1) The State Government shall settle out of the surplus land in a village in which no land is available for community purposes or in which the land as available is less than 15 acres with the Gram Sabha of that village so, however, that the total land in the village available for community purposes after such settlement does not exceed 15 acres. The land so settled with the Gram Sabha shall be used for planting trees, growing fodder or for such other community purposes, as may be prescribed.

(2) The State Government may either settle any surplus land in accordance with sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) or use or permit its use in accordance with Section 25 or manage or otherwise deal with it in such manner as it thinks fit.

(3) Any remaining surplus land shall be settled by the Collector in accordance with the order of preference and subject to the limits, specified respectively in sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 198 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950.

(4) The Commissioner may of his own motion and shall, on the application of any aggrieved person enquire into such settlement and if he is satisfied that the settlement is irregular he may after notice to the person in whose favour such settlement is made to show-cause--

(i) cancel the settlement and the lease, if any, and thereupon, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law or in any instrument, the rights, title and interest of the person in whose favour such settlement was made or lease executed or any person claiming through him in such land shall cease, and such land shall revert to the State Government; and

(ii) direct that every person holding or retaining possession thereof may be evicted, and may for that purpose use or cause to b