State of U.P. Vs. eni Madho.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. of 1987.
(Arising Out of SLP. Leave Petition (C) Nos. 11315 of 1982)
(Arising Out of SLP. Leave Petition (C) Nos. 11315 of 1982)
Petitioner: State of U.P.
Respondent: eni Madho.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. of 1987.
(Arising Out of SLP. Leave Petition (C) Nos. 11315 of 1982)
(Arising Out of SLP. Leave Petition (C) Nos. 11315 of 1982)
Judges: M.P. THAKKAR & B.C. RAY, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Feb 02, 1987
Head Note:
U.P. IMPOSITION OF CEILING ON LAND HOLDINGS ACT, 1960:
Tenure Holder – Ascertainment of – It will be open to the ceiling authorities to decide who was the tenure holder at the material time and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Special leave granted. Heard both the sides.
2. We propose to modify the order passed by the High Court only to the limited extent to clarify that it will be open to the ceiling authorities to ascertain who was the tenure holder at the material time and to decide the matter in accordance with law and the order of the High Court does not preclude them from holding that Beni Madho was not a tenure holder at the material time if after hearing him such a conclusion is warranted. In other words it will be open to the ceiling authorities to decide who was the tenure holder at the material time and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, after hearing Beni Madho (Respondent herein) and the concerned parties. Subject to this modification, the appeal fails and is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.
1. Special leave granted. Heard both the sides.
2. We propose to modify the order passed by the High Court only to the limited extent to clarify that it will be open to the ceiling authorities to ascertain who was the tenure holder at the material time and to decide the matter in accordance with law and the order of the High Court does not preclude them from holding that Beni Madho was not a tenure holder at the material time if after hearing him such a conclusion is warranted. In other words it will be open to the ceiling authorities to decide who was the tenure holder at the material time and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, after hearing Beni Madho (Respondent herein) and the concerned parties. Subject to this modification, the appeal fails and is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.
