However, a master plan for Aligarh was made on 24.2.1980 wherein the land in dispute was shown.
There is also numberdispute that clause B of the Explanation is satisfied by the appellant since the land was entered in the revenue or land records before the appointed day as for the purpose of agriculture.
Thereafter, the Explanation for the purpose of clause o defining urban land and clause q defining vacant land is given.
Clause A of the Explanation defines agriculture.
The High Court set aside the District Judges order on the companystruction it made of Explanation C in Section 2 o defining urban land in the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976.
There is numberdispute that the vacant land of which exclusion is claimed by the appellant on the ground that it is mainly used for the purpose of agriculture is so used according to the definition of agriculture.
Learned companynsel for the appellant argued for restoration of the District Judges order whereby an area of 6738.23 sq.
The definition of urban land in Section 2 o excludes from its ambit, land which is mainly used for the purpose of agriculture.
From the Judgment and Order dated 12.11.1984 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Appeal Nos.
declared by the companypetent authority.
was declared to be in excess of the ceiling limit as against 19813.83 sq.
This has led to the filing of these appeals against the High Courts order made in these two writ petitions against the appellant.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
The companypetent authority declared that the appellant had 19813.83 sq.
The only dispute is with regard to clause C of the Explanation which reads as under Notwithstanding anything companytained in clause B of this Explanation, land shall number be deemed to be mainly used for the purpose of agriculture if the land has been specified in the master plan for a purpose other than agriculture There is numberdispute that the Act came into force in the State of Uttar Pradesh on 17.2.1976 and there was numbermaster plan for that area in Aligarh at that time.
of vacant land in Aligarh in excess of the ceiling limit but the District Judge reduced the area of the excess land to 6738.23 sq.
K. Khanna, Ms. Abha R. Sharma, Manoj Goel and Pankaj Kalra for the Appellant.
4018/80 and 5174 of 1980.
297 298 of 1993.
4018 of 1980 and 5174 of 1980 which were filed by the appellant and the State of Uttar Pradesh against the Judgment dated 12.2.1980 of the District Judge, Aligarh in Land Ceiling Appeal No.24 of 1978.
Ms. Alka Aggrawal, R.C. Verma, Ashok K. Srivastava for the Respondents.
Against the order of the District Judge, both sides filed writ petitions.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VERMA, J. These appeals by special leave are against the judgment and order dated 12.11.1984 of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition Nos.
The High Court dismissed appellants writ petition and partly allowed the writ petition of the State Government.
