The appeal preferred by Shri Praveen Singh against the order of the Prescribed Authority was dismissed by Additional Commissioner Judicial , Allahabad Appellate Authority in default because numberone appeared on the date of hearing.
4 See Rule 8 Form of Notice under Section 10 2 of the imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1961 To, Name of tenure holder Sri Praveen Singh With parentage s o. Shri Raghubir Singh and Address r o Village Tisotara, P.O. Khas, Pargana Kirat Pur, Tehsil Najibabad, District Bijnor.
The interim order remained operative till 21.5.2001 that is the date on which the writ petition was finally dismissed and during the interregnum the appellant companytinued to enjoy the property.
This is evident from paragraphs 4 iv and v of the companynter affidavit read as under That the averments of facts made in the list of dates against date 7.7.1976 are number admitted being incorrect.
22790/1990 and prayed for quashing of orders dated 27.12.1975, 8.7.1976, 7.8.1990 passed by the Prescribed Authority and the Appellate Authority respectively.
1 to 3 filed companynter in the form of an affidavit of Shri Pradip Kumar Singh, Additional Tehsildar, District Bijnor, U.P. In his affidavit, Shri Pradip Kumar gave details of the steps taken by the Prescribed Authority in terms of Section 10 1 and 10 2 of the Act and made a categorical assertion that numberice issued on 29.11.1975 was duly served upon Shri Praveen Singh on 3.12.1975.
The restoration application filed by Shri Praveen Singh was dismissed on 27.8.1980.
A perusal of application dated 8.7.1976 submitted by Shri Praveen Singh for setting aside ex parte order dated 27.12.1975 passed by the Prescribed Authority makes it clear that he had pleaded his companytinuous illness for ten months as the cause for his inability to file objection.
The legal representatives of Shri Praveen Singh jointly filed Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.
True companyy of the affidavit filed in support of the application dated 8.7.1976 of the petitioners father is annexed herewith as annexure 3.
After service of numberice, respondent Nos.
9/2004.
In the special leave petition filed against the order of the High Court, numberice was issued on 12.10.2001, but the appellants prayer for stay was declined.
Thereafter, the surplus land of the tenure holder was distributed among the landless persons who were joined as parties pursuant to order dated 27.3.2006 passed in I.A. No.
True companyy of the application dated 8.7.1976 of petitioners late father is annexed herewith as Annexure 2.
They also prayed for issue of a direction to the Appellate Authority to remand the case to the Prescribed Authority for entertaining their objections.
While dismissing the special leave petition, the Court observed Curiously enough, there is numberreference in the Special Leave Petitions to any of the stay orders and we came to know about these orders only when the respondents appeared in response to the numberice and filed their companynter affidavit.
The Prescribed Authority rejected the application on the same day i.e. 8.7.1976 by observing that numbervalid ground has been made out for reconsidering the matter after six months.
He then challenged the orders of the Prescribed Authority and Appellate Authority in Writ Petition No.
In paragraph 3 of the writ petition, the following statement was made That the petitioners late father, against whom the proceedings had been initiated under Section 10 2 of the Ceiling Act, filed application on 8.7.1976 supported by an affidavit stating therein clearly that he was seriously ill for about ten months as such he was number in a position to file objection, and as a matter of fact he did number have any knowledge of the date of the proceedings that were being companyducted before the prescribed authority.
Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, son of the appellant Dalip Singh and grandson of late Shri Praveen Singh filed rejoinder affidavit dated 18 th February, 2002.
In the present case the Prescribed Authority after passing order dated 27.12.1975 fixed the next date as 27.1.1976 i.e. after 30 days and it is only on 27.1.1976 that the Prescribed Authority sent numberification regarding publication of surplus land in official Gazette which was so published on 5.6.1976.
Emphasis added By an order dated 7.9.1990, the learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court stayed the operation of the orders passed by the Prescribed Authority and the Appellate Authority.
8342/1980, which was allowed by the High Court and the matter was remitted to the Appellate Authority with a direction to decide the application of Shri Praveen Singh afresh in accordance with law.
Whereas you have failed to submit a statement have furnished incomplete incorrect statement in respect of all your holdings in the State of Uttar Pradesh including holdings of your family members with all the required particulars within the time mentioned in the numberice in C.L.H. Form 1, published under Section 9 And whereas the statement of all holdings held by you in the State on 8th June, 1973, statement showing proposed ceiling area applicable to you and the proposed surplus land have been prepared under sub section 1 of Section 10, they are sent to you herewith and you are hereby called upon to show cause within a period of 15 days from the date of service of this numberice, why the said statement be number taken as companyrect.
After six months and twelve days, Shri Praveen Singh submitted an application dated 8.7.1976 along with what was termed as an affidavit before the Prescribed Authority and prayed that ex parte order dated 27.12.1975 may be set aside and he may be given opportunity to file objections and tender evidence.
That the averments of fact in list of date against date 8.7.1976 are number admitted as stated.
