SH. RAGHUBIR SINGH AND ORS. versus STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 503 · Decided: 17-04-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

SH. RAGHUBIR SINGH AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. 
APRIL 17, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND S.P. BHARUCHA, .JJ.] 
B 
U.P. Impositio11 of Ceili11g on Land Holdings Act, 1960: 
Section 12-A and clause (d) of its proviso-Transfer of land-Held to 
be void and that has become final-Siltce there is no transfer in the eye of 
law there is no occasion to apply S. 12-A and clause ( d) of the proviso-Hence 
C 
the transfer of land 1ightly not taken into co11sideration for detennining the 
ceiling. 
Ravindra Singh v. Phool Singh & Anr., [1995] 1 SCC 251 relied on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 662 of D 
1985. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 14.9.84 of the Allahabad High 
Court in C. Misc. W.P. No. 3077 of 1982. 
Ms. Rachna Gupta and Mrs. Rani Chhabra for the Appellants. 
R.C. Verma and S.P. Sharma for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
E 
The appeal arises from the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad 
}< 
dated September 14, 1984 in which, upon a writ petition, it set aside the 
order of the First Additional District Judge, Nainital in a Ceiling Appeal. 
The third respondent was the tenure-holder of agricultural land 
situated in Village Gumsani and Village Bichpuri. She transferred 64 
bighas of the land in Village Gumsani to appellant Nos. 1 to 3 by a G 
registered sale deed dated 10th May, 1974. On the same date, she trans-
ferred 64 bighas of the land in Village Bichpuri to the fourth appellant. In 
response to a notice under Section 10(2) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling 
on Land Holdings Act, 1960, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') the third 
respondent filed objections. The appellants sought to be made parties H 
503 
504 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996J SUPP.1 S.C.R. 
A 
thereto and were impleaded. The prescribed authority did not accept as 
valid the transfers made by the third respondent in favour of the appellants, 
as aforesaid, and appeals were filed from his order. It is enough to state 
that the appeals were dismissed all the way and upon special leave petition 
filed by the appellants before this Court, the following order was passed : 
B 
c 
"Upon hearing counsel, the Court dismissed the Special Leave 
Petition. But so far as the surplus land to be surrendered is 
concerned, the Prescribed Authority shall decide as to which land 
should be required to be surrendered, after hearing the tenure 
holder Smt. Mohinder Kaur as a transferee and Gurdev Singh's 
Legal Representative and in accordance with the Section 12(A) of 
the imposition of ceiling of Land Holding Act 1960, as also the 
agreement dated 16.1.1974 and the sale deed between the tenure 
holder Smt. Mohinder Kaur and Gurdev Singh relating lo the 
transferee of the land." 
D 
The third respondent thereupon elected to surrender the land which 
had been transferred by her to the appellants. The appellants objected, but 
the prescribed authority overruled the same. The Ceiling Appeal was filed 
which was allowed by the Additional District Judge. Against his order, the 
third respondent filed the writ petition upon which the order under appeal 
E was passed. 
F 
G 
H 
Learned counsel for the appellants drew our attention to the terms 
of the order of this Court aforequoted a.'l.d the provisions of Section 12-A 
of the sai.d Act. The relevant provisions, upon which emphasis was laid, 
read thus : 
"!\.12-A. - In determining the surplus land under Section 11 or 
Se.ction 12, the Prescribed Authority shall as far as possible accept 
the choice indicated by the tenure-holder to the plot or plots, which 
he and other members of his family, if any, would like to retain as 
part of the ceiling area applicable to him or them under the 
provisions of this Act, whether indicated by him in his statement 
under Section 9 or in any subsequent proceedings : 
Provided that -
( d) where any person holds land in excess of the ceiling area 
-
RAGHUBIRSINGHv. STATE 
505 
including land which is the subject of any transfer or partition A 
referred to in sub-section ( 6) or sub-section (7) of Section 5, 
the surplus land d<;termined shall, as far as possible, be land 
other than land which is the subject of such transfer or 
partition, and if the surplus land includes any land which is 
the subject of such transfer or partition, the transfer or 
partition shall, in so far as it relates to the land included in 
the surplus land, be deemed to be and always to have been 
void, and -
(i) it shall be open to the transfere

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.