Point of Law: The fact that a tenure holder is not recorded as such in the revenue records is not relevant for determining whether he is entitled to file an objection to the statement prepared under Section 10(1) of the Act and issued notice to another person under Section 10(2) of the Act and the above fact does not disentitle him to file an objection if he is otherwise entitled to do so.

JUDGMENT :

DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J.

1. The present petition has been filed, impugning the orders dated 29.07.1992 and 20.01.1994 passed by the Prescribed Authority and the Appellate Authority under the provisions of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (for short “the Act 1960”).

2. The Prescribed Authority (Ceiling), Lucknow rejected the objections filed by the petitioners under Section 11(2) of the Act, 1960 against which the appeal got dismissed by the Appellate Authority. The orders passed to the said effect are under challenge in this petition.

3. One Tej Narain Dar was exclusive owner in possession of agricultural land, consisting of several plots in village Katarabakkash, Pargana and Tehsil Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow. He became owner and got possession of the said land as a result of partition decree of the year 1976 passed under Section 176 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act.

4. Parents of Tej Narain Dar, namely, Anand Swaroop Narain Dar and Smt. Mohan Rani Dar had three more sons, namely, Jagdish Narain Dar, Ishwar Narain Dar and Rajendra Narain Dar. It is said that wife of Tej Narain Dar also owned and exclusively possessed agricultural land holding in her name as Bhumidhar with transferable rights.

5. A notice under Section 10(2) of the Act, 1960 was issued to Tej Narain Dar, clubbing his land-holding and land holding of his wife, treating them to be one unit. After contest, the ceiling area of husband and wife was determined and surplus area was declared by the Prescribed Authority vide order dated 26.09.1974.

6. In the year 1976, Smt. Mohan Rani Dar, mother of Tej Narain Dar and his three brothers, died. She was in possession of separate bhumidhari agricultural land holding. Her land holding got devolved amongst her sons, namely, Tej Narain Dar, Rajendra Narain Dar and Smt. Urmila Dar, widow of Ishwar Narain Dar and Smt. Nirmala Dar, wife of Late Jagdish Narain Dar to the extent of 1/4th share to each through sale-deed dated 20.07.1966. As a result of bequest 1/4th share of his mother by virtue of the will dated 20.07.1966. The total land holding in possession of Tej Narain Dar, after the first ceiling proceedings crossed the ceiling limits and, in view of increase in his land holding, Tej Narain Dar informed the Ceiling Authority himself about his land holding having got increased. A fresh notice under Section 10(2) of the Act, 1960 for the second time was issued to him. He voluntarily surrendered his specified plots of land for declaring the surplus area. The Prescribed Authority (Ceiling), Lucknow passed the final order dated 03.12.1981, declaring for the second time the surplus land of Tej Narain Dar.

7. Against the said order dated 03.12.1981, Rajendra Narain Dar preferred an appeal before the District Judge, Lucknow and also filed objection before the Prescribed Authority, alleging that while declaring surplus land of Tej Narain Dar and his wife, some of his own plots had been declared as surplus land by including them in the holding of Tej Narain Dar. In view of the objection filed by Rajendra Narain Dar, the appeal filed by him got abated. The ceiling proceedings against Tej Narain Dar, which was initially decided on 03.12.1981, was re-opened after recalling the order dated 03.12.1981.

8. The petitioners filed an objection in the said proceedings on 02.09.1987 through which the reopening of the ceiling proceedings of Tej Narain Dar was opposed and, in the alternate, it was claimed that most of the land in possession of Tej Narain Dar and his wife was the tenancy of the petitioners through the various deeds.

9. The Prescribed Authority, after hearing the parties, vide order dated 28.11.1987 determined the surplus area of Tej Narain Dar and his wife, treating them to be one unit. Plot nos. 1643/1, area 19 Biswas and 15 Biswansis, 1744/1, area 2 Biswas, 14 Biswansis and 10 Kachhwansis besides other plots were declared surplus which had been given by Taj Narain Dar to the petitioners.

10. It may be noted