GURPRIT SINGH vs STATE OF U. P. - 2012 Supreme(UK) 384

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2012 Supreme(UK) 384

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
B.S. Verma
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 5855 of 2001
(Old No. 6328 of 1988)
GURPRIT SINGH & ORS. – Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF U.P. & TWO ORS. – Respondents
WITH Writ Petition (M/S) No. 5856 of 2001
(Old No. 6357 of 1988)
PARAMJEET KAUR & ORS. – Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF U.P. & TWO ORS. – Respondents
Decided on : 21.08.2012

Advocates:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Shyam Mohan, Mr. Paresh Tripathi and Mr. Akhilesh Kalra, Advs.
For the Respondents: Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Brief Holder
For the Petitioners: Mr. Shyam Mohan, Mr. Paresh Tripathi and Mr. Akhilesh Kalra, Advs.
For the Respondents: Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Brief Holder

Headnote:(A) U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, Secs. 9, 10(2), 12-A and U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Rules, 1961, Rule 10 — Demarcation of holdings of a tenure holder in a joint khata has to be made under Rule 10 only when the stage of giving choice under Section 12-A is arrived at and not at the time of issuance of notice as prescribed under section 10 of the Act — Such compliance of Rule 10 having been done — Contention to the contrary held, not tenable. (Paras 31, 32, 34, 35)
       (B) U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 and Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, Secs. 1, 3, 4 — Claim of tenure holders that the land in question fell within a certain ‘urban agglomeration’ — Not tenable since the concerned agglomeration in District Udham Singh Nagar which came into existence only in 1995 and till then the land in question fell within territory of district Nainital no town of which was covered under the Urban Ceiling Act. (Paras 43 to 53)
       (C) U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, Sec. 5(6) — Scope and ambit of — All transfers of land falling under Act, made through sale deeds executed after the cut off date i.e. 24.01.1971 have to be ignored and not taken into account unless their bonafide is proved by the tenure holders to the satisfaction of Prescribed Authority. (Paras 47, 54, 55)
       (D) U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, Sec. 4-A and Rules, 1961, Rule 3 — Determination of nature of land, whether irrigated or unirrigated, for purpose of provisions of the 1960 Act — Relevant documents for — Copies of khasra of 1378 Fasli, 1379 Fasli and 1380 Fasli prepared and maintained by revenue authorities which are the custodian of revenue records are relevant.
        (Paras 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61)

       ¼v½ mÙkj izns’k tksr Hkwfe lhek jksi.k vf/kfu;e] 1960] /kkjk 9] 10¼2½ o
12-A ,oa mÙkj izns’k tksr Hkwfe lhek jksi.k fu;ekoyh] 1961] fu;e 10 & [kkrsnkj dh tksr dh Hkwfe ds lfEefyr [kkrs esa lhekadu fu;e 10 ds vUrxZr dsoy rHkh vko’;drk gksrh gS] tc /kkjk 12-A ds vUrxZr ;g pquko djus dk le; vkrk gS fd mls dkSu lh Hkwfe dks vf/kd Hkwfe ds :i esa NksM+uk gS] uk fd vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 10 ds vUrxZr uksfVl tkjh djus ds le; & ,sls Lrj ij lhekadu djk;k tkus dh fLFkfr esa blds foijhr dFku vekU; gSA ¼izLrj 31] 32] 34] 35½
       ¼c½ mÙkj izns’k tksr Hkwfe lhek jksi.k vf/kfu;e] 1960 rFkk uxjh; Hkwfe ¼lhek rFkk fofu;eu½ vf/kfu;e] 1976] /kkjk 1] 3] 4 & [kkrsnkj dk ;g nkok fd iz’uxr Hkwfe uxj cfLr;ksa esa vkrh gSa vkSj ml ij vf/kfu;e 1976 ykxw gksrk gS] fujk/kkj gS D;ksafd ftl tuin es aog fLFkr gS] mlds Hkkx ij mDr vf/kfu;e ykxw ugha FkkA
        ¼izLrj 43 ls 53½
       ¼l½ mÙkj izns’k tksr Hkwfe lhek jksi.k vf/kfu;e] 1960] /kkjk 5¼6½ & ,slh Hkwfe tks vf/kfu;e] 1960 ds vUrxZr vkrh gS fd ,sls lHkh vUrj.k tks fnukad 24-01-1971 ds ckn fuLikfnr gq, mu ij dksbZ fopkj.k ugha fd;k tk,xk tc rd fd ;g uk fl) dj fn;k tk, fd og ln~Hkkoh gSA ¼izLrj 47] 54] 55½
       ¼n½ mÙkj izns’k tksr Hkwfe lhek jksi.k vf/kfu;e] 1960] /kkjk
4-A o fu;ekoyh] 1961] fu;e 3 & Hkwfe dh izÑfr fd og flafpr gS vFkok vflafpr dk mDr vf/kfu;e ds izkoèkkuksa ds mn~ns’; gsrq vo/kkj.k & mDr ds fy;s lqlaxr vfHkys[k 1378] 1379 o 1380 Qlyh ds [kljk dh izfrfyfi;k¡ tks jktLo izkf/kdkfj;ksa tks jktLo vfHkys[kksa ds vfHkj{kd gSa] }kjk rS;kj fd;s tkrs gSaA ¼izLrj 56 ls 61½

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J.

Since the controversy involved in both these writ petitions is similar, therefore, for the sake of convenience they are being decided by this common judgment.

2. By means of Writ Petition (M/S) No.5855 of 2001, the petitioners have sought the following relief:-

I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders of the opposite party no. 1 and 2 and summon the record of the case.

II. Issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case may kindly be passed.

II(a) Issue a writ, order or direction or writ in the nature of mandamus declaring the proceedings held under U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 against the petitioners as void ab-initio.

3. By means of Writ Petition (M/S) No.5856 of 2001, the petitioners have sought the following relief:-

I. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ, direction or order and call for the record of the petitioners case and quash the impugned orders dated 29.11.82 (Annexure 1(a) and 1(b) and dated 15.2.88 (Annexure II to the petition).

II. Issue a writ, order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case may kindly be passed.

III Award costs of the petition.

4. Brief facts, giving rise to the writ petition no. 5855 of 2001 (Old No. 6328 of 1988), as emerges out from the record are that the petitioners are the joint tenure holders of the agricultural lands of Khatauni Khata Nos. 14 and 33 situated in village Fazalpur, Mahrola, Tehsil Kichha, district Nainital. It appears that after amendment made in the year 1973 in the U.P. Imposition of Ceilings on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (for short 1960 Act), proceedings under the said Act were initiated against the petitioner Gurpreet Singh bearing Ceiling Case No. 51/27 of 1974-75, State Vs. Gurpreet Singh. The Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Officer Kichha issued notices to each of the petitioners under sub-section (2) of Section 10 of 1960 Act calling upon them as to why the land of their holding in excess of the ceiling limit be not declared as surplus. An objection was raised before the Prescribed Authority that the entire land of the tenure holder is unirrigated and there is grove and banjar land for which no exemption has been given. Some other persons filed their objection contending that they purchased some of the land from the tenure holder by sale deed dated 22-3-1975. The learned Prescribed Authority found that the objectors were not tenure holder on 8-6-1973 therefore they are not entitled to file their objection. Petitioner Gurpreet Singh also did not file his objection, therefore, the Prescribed Authority by his order dated 28-4-76 declared the land measuring 216 Bigha, 04 Biswa i.e. 13.69 Hectares of tenure holder Gurpreet Singh in terms of irrigated land as surplus. It also appears that a separate Ceiling Case No. 51/23 of 1974-75 was registered against Harpreet Singh son of Sri Harpal Singh (petitioner no.2 herein) and notice under Section 10(2) of the 1960 Act was issued to him. The tenure holder filed his objection on 7-11-1974 asserting that the holing in his possession is un-irrigated and there is house, grove, Ushar land for which exemption has to be given and that the tenure holder has already sold 50 acres to land from his holding to others, who are lessee over the said land. The Prescribed Authority found that the tenure holder had not disclosed the date of sale of land and the names of the purchasers. Some other persons also filed objections and contended that they have purchased the land from the tenure holder in the year 1973-74. The Prescribed Authority found that none of those perso

Click Here to Read the rest of this document