Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3058 OF 2008

M/s. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd.           …Appellant

Versus   State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.             …Respondents

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3085 OF 2008 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3068 OF 2008 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3089 OF 2008 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3165 OF 2008 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3086 OF 2008 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3082 OF 2008 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3066 OF 2008 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3071 OF 2008 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3197 OF 2008

JUDGEMENT

R.M. Lodha, J.

This batch of  ten appeals by special  leave raises  

identical issues and emanates from a common order passed by  

the Additional Commissioner (Administration) Meerut Division,  

Meerut and, therefore, all  these appeals were heard together  

and are being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. It  is  not  necessary  to  refer  to  the  facts  of  each  

appeal as narration of facts in Civil Appeal No. 3058 of 2008  

would suffice for deciding the controversy raised in this group of  

appeals.

3. On  January  24,  2002,  the  Additional  Collector  

(Finance/Revenue)  (for  short,  ‘Prescribed  Authority’),  

Gautambudh Nagar issued a notice under Section 9(2) of U.P.  

Imposition  of  Ceiling  on Land Holdings  Act,  1960 (for  short,  

‘Act, 1960’)  calling upon the appellants to file details of the land  

held by them in Ceiling Land Holding Form No. 2 (for short,  

‘CLH Form-2’)  along with enclosures within  a period of  thirty  

days from the date of notice.

4. Pursuant to the aforesaid notice under Section 9(2),  

the appellants submitted its reply on February 21, 2002 raising  

diverse objections, inter alia; (1) that notice under Section 9(2)  

could only be issued to a tenure-holder who holds agricultural  

land and not to one who does not hold agricultural land; (ii) that  

in the form annexed with the notice, the land of the objectors  

has been wrongly shown as irrigated. As a matter of fact, the  

subject land was purchased by the appellants through separate  

2

sale deeds dated March 3, 1987; March 10, 1987 and April 20,  

1987; which   was already recorded as ‘abadi’ land at the time  

of purchase; (iii) that the residential quarters for the labour as  

well as industries exist over the land, and; (iv) that the land held  

by  them is not covered by any of the provisions of the Act,  

1960. In the statement submitted by the appellant  in  C.L.H.  

Form-2, it was stated under every column ‘not applicable’.

5. On May 23, 2002,  the Prescribed Authority called  

upon the appellants to submit the details of each khata holders  

separately along with the chart.

6. On June 4,  2002,  the appellants,  pursuant  to  the  

order dated May 23, 2002, submitted the details of the holding  

in the chart form indicating the nature of land as ‘industrial’ and  

‘abadi’.

7. The  Prescribed  Authority  vide  his  order  dated  

December  17,  2003  cancelled  the  notice   holding  that  the  

provisions of Section 9(2) of the Act, 1960 are applicable only in  

respect of the khatedars who hold agricultural land in use more  

than the prescribed area whereas the objectors’ land is entered  

3

as industrial/abadi.  He ordered that necessary endorsement to  

the said effect be made in the revenue record.

8. Not  satisfied  with  the  order  dated  December  17,  

2003 passed by  the  Prescribed  Authority,  the  State  of  Uttar  

Pradesh  through  Collector,  Gautambudh  Nagar  preferred  

appeal  under  Section  13  of  the  Act,  1960  before  the  

Commissioner,  Meerut  Division,  Meerut.   Nine other  appeals  

also came to be  filed  against   the identical   orders  of  the  

Prescribed Authority.  

9. The  appellants  raised  preliminary  objection  about  

the maintainability  of  the appeals  as,  according to  them, the  

orders  passed  by  the  Prescribed  Authority  were  not  

appealable.

10. The  Additional  Commissioner  (Administration),  

Meerut Division (Appellate Authority) took up all the ten appeals  

together  and,  after  hearing  the  parties,  by  his  order  dated  

October 29, 2004 overruled the preliminary objection raised by  

the present appellants regarding the maintainability of appeals  

and held that the appeals lay from the orders passed by the  

Prescribed Authority.  

4

11. The  appellants  challenged  the  order  of  the  

Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut  by filing writ  

petitions before the High Court.

12. The  Single  Judge  heard  the  parties  and  vide  

judgment and order dated May 24, 2007 held that the view of  

the  Appellate  Authority  in  holding  the  appeals  maintainable  

warranted  no  interference.  Hence,  these  appeals  by  special  

leave.

13. The question as to whether the appeals preferred  

by the State of Uttar Pradesh through Collector under Section  

13 of  the  Act,  1960 aggrieved  by the  orders  passed  by the  

Prescribed  Authority  are  maintainable  or  not  has  to  be  

considered and decided in the light of the statutory provisions  

contained in the Act, 1960; rules framed  thereunder  and the  

nature of the order dated December 17, 2003.  It is, therefore,  

appropriate that we refer to the statutory provisions first.

14. Act, 1960 was enacted to provide for the imposition  

of   ceiling  on land holdings in  Uttar Pradesh and other matters  

5

connected therewith; the main objective of the Act, 1960 being  

to provide for more equitable distribution of land by making the  

same available to the extent  possible to  landless agricultural  

labourers  and  to  provide  for  cultivation  on cooperative  basis  

and to conserve part of the available resources in land so as to  

increase  the  production  and  preserve  stock  of  food-grains  

against lean years.   

15. Section 3(2)  defines ‘ceiling area’  that  means the  

area  of  land  not  being  land  exempted  under  the  Act,  

determined  as  such  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  

Section 5.  

‘Holding’ under Section 3(9) means the land or lands held  

by a person as a bhumidar, sirdar, asami of Gaon Sabha or an  

asami mentioned in Section 11 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari  

Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, or as a tenant under the  

U.P.  Tenancy  Act,  1939,  other  than  a  sub-tenant,  or  as  a  

Government  lessee,  or  as  a  sub-lessee  of  a  Government  

lessee, where the period of the sub-lease is co-extensive with  

the period of the lease.

6

‘Prescribed  authority’  under  Section  3(13)  means such  

officer not below the rank of an Assistant Collector of the first  

class  as  may  be  empowered  by  the  State  Government,  by  

notification  in  the  Gazette,  to  perform  the  functions  of  

prescribed authority under this Act for such area or areas as  

may be specified in that behalf.

‘Surplus land’ under Section 3(16) means land held by a  

tenure-holder in excess of the ceiling area applicable to him,  

and includes any buildings, wells and trees existing thereon.

‘Tenure-holder’ under Section 3(17) means a person who  

is the holder of a holding, but [except in Chapter III] does not  

include-

(a) a woman whose husband is a tenure-holder;

(b) a minor child whose father or mother is a

tenure-holder.

16. Section 5 imposes ceiling on land holdings from the  

appointed  date  and  further  mandates  that  no  tenure-holder  

shall be entitled to hold in the aggregate any land in excess of  

ceiling area applicable to him throughout Uttar Pradesh.

7

17. Section  6  makes  a  provision  for  exemption  of  

certain land from the imposition of ceiling as set out therein.

18. Section  9  mandates  the  prescribed  authority  to  

issue general notice to tenure-holders holding land in excess of  

ceiling area for submission of statement in respect thereof.  It  

reads thus :

“9. General  notice to tenure-holders holding land in  excess of  ceiling area  for  submission of  statement  in  respect thereof.—[1]  As soon as may be, after the date of  enforcement of  this Act,  the Prescribed Authority  shall,  by  general notice, published in the Official  Gazette,  call  upon  every tenure-holder holding land in excess of the ceiling area  applicable to him on the date of enforcement of this Act, to  submit to him within 30 days of the date of publication of this  notice, a statement in respect of all his holdings in such form  and  giving  such  particulars  as  may  be  prescribed.  The  statement shall also indicate the plot or plots for which he  claims  exemption  and  also  those  which  he  would  like  to  retain  as  part  of  the  ceiling  area  applicable  to  him under  provisions of this Act.

[(2) As soon as may be after the enforcement of the Uttar  Pradesh  Imposition  of  Ceiling  on  Land  Holdings  (Amendment)  Act,  1972  the  prescribed  authority  shall,  by  like  general  notice,  call  upon  every  tenure-holder  holding  land in excess of the ceiling area applicable to him on the  enforcement of the said Act, to submit to him within 30 days  of publication of such notice a statement referred to in sub- section (1):

[Provided that at any time after October 10, 1975, the  Prescribed Authority may, by notice, call  upon any tenure- holder holding land in excess of the ceiling area applicable to  him on the said date, to submit to him within thirty days from  the date of service of such notice a statement referred to in  sub-section (1) or any information pertaining thereto.];

8

[(2-A) Every tenure-holder holding land in excess of  the  ceiling  area  on  January  24,  1971,  or  at  any  time  thereafter who has not submitted the statement referred to in  sub-section (2) and in respect of whom no proceeding under  this Act is pending on October 10, 1975 shall,  within thirty  days from the said date furnish to the Prescribed Authority a  statement containing particulars of all land—

(a) held  by  him  and  the  members  of  his  family  on  January 24, 1971;

(b) acquired or disposed of by him or by members of  his family between January 24, 1971 and October  10, 1975.]

3. Where the tenure-holders’ wife holds any land which  is liable to be aggregated with the land held by the tenure- holder for purposes of determination of the ceiling area, the  tenure-holder shall,  along with his statement referred to in  sub-section (1), also file the consent of his wife to the choice  in respect of the plot or plots which they would like to retain  as part of the ceiling area applicable to them and where his  wife’s consent  is  not  so obtained the Prescribed Authority  shall cause the notice under sub-section (2) of Section 10 to  be served on her separately.]”

19. Sections 10, 11, 12 and 13 which have bearing in  

this case read as follows :

“10. Notice to tenure-holders failing to submit a  statement  or  submitting  an  incomplete  or  incorrect  statement.—(1) In  every  case  where  a  tenure-holder  fails  to  submit  a  statement  or  submits  an  incomplete  or  incorrect statement, required to be submitted under Section  9, the Prescribed Authority shall, after making such enquiry  as he may consider necessary either by himself or by any  person  subordinate  to  him,  cause  to  be  prepared  a  statement containing such particulars as may be prescribed.  The statement  shall  in  particular  indicate  the land,  if  any,  exempted [under Section 6] and the plot or plots proposed to  be declared as surplus land.

(2) The  Prescribed  Authority  shall  thereupon  cause to be served upon every such tenure-holder in such  manner as may be prescribed, a notice together with a copy  

9

of the statement prepared under sub-section (1) calling upon  him to show cause  within a period specified in the notice,  why  the  statement  be  not  taken  as  correct.  The  period  specified shall  not be less than ten days from the date of  service of the notice.

11. Determination  of  surplus  land  where  no  objection is filed. –(1) Where the statement submitted by a  tenure-holder  in  pursuance  of  the  notice  published  under  Section  9,  is  accepted  by  the  Prescribed  Authority  or  whether the statement prepared by the Prescribed Authority  under Section 10 is not disputed within the specified period,  the  Prescribed  Authority  shall  accordingly  determine  the  surplus land of the tenure-holder.

(2) The Prescribed Authority shall,  on application  made within thirty days from the date of the order under sub- section  (1)  by  a  tenure-holder  aggrieved  by  such  order  passed in his absence and on sufficient cause being shown  for his absence, set aside the order and allow such tenure- holder to file objection against the  statement prepared under  Section 10 and proceed to decide the same in accordance  with the provisions of Section 12.

(3) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) and  Section 13,  the order of  the Prescribed Authority shall  be  final and conclusive and be not questioned in any court of  law.

12. Determination  of  the  surplus  land  by  the  Prescribed  Authority  where  an  objection  is  filed.—(1)  Where an objection has been filed under sub-section (2) of  Section  10  or  under  sub-section  (2)  of  Section  11,  or  because  of  any  appellate  order  under  Section  13,  the  Prescribed  Authority  shall,  after  affording  the  parties  reasonable  opportunity  of  being  heard  and  of  producing  evidence, decide the objections after recording his reasons,  and determine the surplus land.   

(2)  Subject to any appellate  order under Section 13,  the order of the Prescribed  Authority under sub-section (1)  shall be final and conclusive and be not questioned in any  court of law.

 13. Appeals—(1) Any party aggrieved by an order  under  sub-section  (2)  of  Section  11  or  Section  12,  may,  

10

within thirty days of the date of the order, prefer an appeal to  the [Commissioner] within whose jurisdiction the land or any  part thereof is situate.

(2) The  [Commissioner]  shall  dispose  of  the  appeal  as  expeditiously  as  possible  and  his  decision  thereon  shall  be  final  and  conclusive  and  be  not  questioned in any court of law.

(3) Where  an  appeal  is  preferred  under  this  section, the [Commissioner] may stay enforcement of the  order  appealed  against  for  such  time  and  on  such  conditions as may be considered just  and proper:  

[Provided that the enforcement of the order appealed  against shall not be stayed in respect of that part of the land  the surplus character of which was either not disputed in an  objection under sub-section (2) of Section 10 or under sub- section (2) of Section 11 or is not disputed in the appeal and  any stay order passed under this sub-section before twenty- eighth  day  of  September,  1970,  shall,  on  an  application  being made in that behalf to the appellate Court by the State  Government, be modified by that court accordingly.

Explanation  –For  the  purposes  of  this  proviso  any  dispute respecting regularity, validity or legality of a notice  under Section 9 or Section 10 or of the proceedings before  the prescribed authority shall not, by itself, be deemed to be  a dispute respecting the surplus character of land.]

20. Section  29  makes  a  provision  for  subsequent  

declaration  of  further  land  and  surplus  land  and  Section  30  

provides  for  determination  of  surplus  land  regarding  future  

acquisition. These provisions are :

“29. Subsequent  declaration  of  further  land as  surplus land.—Where after the date of enforcement of the  Uttar  Pradesh  Imposition  of  Ceiling  on  Land  Holdings  (Amendment) Act, 1972—

11

(a) any land has come to be held by a tenure-holder  under a decree or order of any court, or as a result  of  succession  or  transfer,  or  by  prescription  in  consequence  of  adverse  possession,  and  such  land  together  with  the land  already held  by him  exceeds the ceiling area applicable to him; or

(b) any unirrigated land becomes irrigated land as a  result  of irrigation from a State irrigation work or  any grove-land loses its character as grove-land or  any land exempted under this Act ceases to fall  under any of the categories exempted—

the  ceiling  area  shall  be  liable  to  be  re-determined  [and  accordingly  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  except  Section  16,  shall mutatis mutandis apply]

30.   Determination of surplus land regarding future  acquisition.—(1) Where any land has become liable to be  treated as surplus land [* * *]  under  Section  29,  the  tenure-holder shall, within such period as may be prescribed,  submit a statement to the Prescribed Authority in the form  and in the manner laid down under Section 9 indicating in  the statement the plot or plots which he would like to retain  as a part of his ceiling area.

(2) (a) Where  the  statement  submitted  under  sub- section (1) is accepted by the Prescribed Authority, it shall  proceed to determine the surplus land accordingly.

(b) Where  a  tenure-holder  fails  to  submit  a  statement required to be submitted under sub-section (1) or  submits an incomplete or incorrect statement the Prescribed  Authority  shall  proceed  in  the  manner  laid  down  under  Section 10.

(c) The  provisions  of  this  Act  in  respect  of  declaration,  acquisition,  disposal  and settlement of  surplus  land, shall, mutatis mutandis, apply to surplus land covered  by this section.”

21. In exercise of the powers conferred under Act, 1960  

rules have been framed  called Uttar  Pradesh Imposition  on  

12

Ceiling of Land Holdings Rules, 1961 (for short ‘Rules, 1961’).  

Rule  6  provides  that  the  general  notice  to  be  published  in  

pursuance  of  Section  9  and  the  statement  required  to  be  

submitted  thereunder  by  every  tenure-holder  holding  land  in  

excess of the ceiling area applicable to him in the State shall be  

in CLH Forms - 1 and 2 respectively.

22. Rule 8 reads thus :

“8. As soon as may be,  after  the expiry of thirty  days  from the date of  publication of  the general  notice in  C.L.H.  Form  1  in  the  official  Gazette,  the  Prescribed  Authority shall cause to be served upon every tenure-holder,  who has failed to submit the statement in C.L.H. Form 2 or  has submitted an incomplete or incorrect statement, a notice  in C.L.H. Form 4 together with a copy of the statement in  C.L.H. Form 3, prepared under Rule 6  calling upon him to  show cause within a period of fifteen days from the date of  service  of  the  notice  why  the  aforesaid  statement  be  not  taken as correct :

Provided that where the statement in C.L.H. Form 3  also includes land ostensibly held in the name of any other  person,  the  prescribed  authority  shall  cause  to  be  served  upon such other person a notice in C.L.H. Form 4 together  with a copy of the statement in C.L.H. Form 3 calling upon  him to show cause within a period of fifteen days from the  date of service of the notice why the aforesaid statement be  not taken as correct :

Provided further that  in the case of  a tenure-holder  who is a member of the Armed Forces (Military, Naval or Air  Force) of the Union of India, the period within which he will  be called upon to show cause why the statement in C.L.H.  Form 3 be not taken as correct, shall be ninety days from the  date of service (of the notice in C.L.H. Form 4.]”

13

23. Rule  12  provides  that  objections  filed  under  

Sections 10 and 11 shall be entered in Misalband Register in  

C.L.H.  Form-5.   The  various  forms  are  appended  to  Rules,  

1961.  

24.  In D.N. Taneja v. Bhajan Lal1, a three-Judge Bench  

of this Court observed that the question whether there is right of  

appeal or not will have to be considered on an interpretation of  

the provision of the statute and not on the ground of propriety or  

any  other  consideration.   In  V.C.  Shukla v.  State  through  

C.B.I.2, this Court while dealing with the submission that right of  

appeal  should  be  liberally  construed  referred  to  the  

observations of Crawford : The Construction of Statutes, “…..

Moreover, statutes pertaining to the right of appeal should be  

given a liberal construction in favour of the right, since they are  

remedial.  Accordingly, the right will not be restricted or denied  

unless such a construction is unavoidable” and held:

“There can be no dispute regarding the correctness of the  proposition mentioned in the statement extracted above, but  here  as  the  right  of  appeal  is  expressly  excluded  by  providing  that  no  appeal  shall  lie  against  an  interlocutory  order, it is not possible for us to stretch the language of the  

1 (1988) 3 SCC 26 2 1980 suppl SCC 92

14

section to give a right of appeal when no such right has been  conferred. Even the statement extracted above clearly says  that  “the  right  will  not  be  restricted  unless  such  a  construction is unavoidable”. In the instant case, in view of  non-obstante  clause,  Section  11(1)  of  the  Act  cannot  be  construed  to  contain  a  right  of  appeal  even  against  an  interlocutory  order  and,  therefore,  the  present  clause  falls  within  the  last  part  of  the  statement  of  the  Crawford,  extracted above”.

25. It is well known  that right  of appeal is not a natural  

or   inherent  right.   It  cannot  be  assumed   to  exist   unless  

expressly provided  for by statute.  Being a creature of statute,  

remedy  of  appeal  must  be  legitimately  traceable   to  the  

statutory provisions.  It  is true that mere omission or error in  

quoting the provisions would not affect the maintainability  of  

appeal,  if  otherwise,  the  order  impugned    is  amenable  to  

appeal.

26. In the light of the legal position noticed above, we  

may now turn to the nature of the order dated December 17,  

2003 passed by the prescribed authority which  admittedly  is  

the   culmination  of  the  proceedings  pursuant  to  the  notice  

issued to the appellants under Section 9(2) of the Act, 1960.

27. Pertinently, by  a notice issued to the appellants on  

January 24, 2002 under Section 9(2) of the Act, 1960 that  they  

15

were called upon  to submit the details of the land in excess of  

the  ceiling  limits.   In  response  thereto,  the  appellants  filed  

objections bringing to the notice of the Prescribed Authority that  

the  land  purchased   by  them  was  already  recorded  as  

‘abadi/industrial’ land under the provisions of   U.P. Zamindari  

Abolition  and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (for short ‘Act, 1950’).  

The appellants, thus, submitted that the land held by them was  

not covered by the Act, 1960.   They submitted a statement in  

C.L.H. Form-2 stating  under each column, ‘not applicable’. The  

Prescribed Authority accepted the objections of the appellants  

and cancelled the notice issued to them under Section 9(2).   In  

the circumstances, the order dated December 17, 2003 cannot  

be said to be an order under Section 11(1). The question is : is  

that order an order under Section 12 read with Section 11(2)?  

Or,  in  other  words,  whether  the  objections  filed  by  the  

appellants  on  February  21,  2002  and  the   subsequent  

statement in the form of chart pursuant to the order dated May  

23, 2002 are objections under Section 10(2) of the Act, 1960?  

28. The scheme of the statutory provisions contained in  

Sections 9, 10, 11 and  12 is that once the Prescribed Authority  

16

issues general notice to tenure-holders or specific notice  to a  

tenure-holder  holding  land  in  excess  of  ceiling  area  for  

submission of statement in respect thereof, a tenure-holder is  

required  to  file  statement  within  the  time  prescribed  in  the  

notice. Where a tenure-holder fails to submit a statement or he  

submits  a  statement  which   is  incomplete  or  incorrect,  the  

Prescribed Authority, after making necessary enquiry either by  

himself or by a subordinate officer, cause a statement prepared  

in C.L.H Form-3 indicating therein the particulars of  the land  

exempted  under  Section  6  and  the  land  proposed  to  be  

declared as surplus.  The Prescribed Authority,  under Section  

10(2) then serves upon such tenure-holder a notice in C.L.H.  

From-4 together with the copy of statement prepared in C.L.H.  

Form-3 calling upon him to show cause why such statement  

prepared  in  C.L.H.  Form  3  be  not  taken    as  correct.  The  

provision contemplates  tenure-holder to be given at least 10  

days from the date of service of notice for his response.   The  

tenure-holder  may  either   accept  such  statement   or  file  

objections  thereto.   If  he  accepts  that   statement,  the  

Prescribed Authority    determines  the   surplus  land.   Such  

17

order is  an order   under  Section 11(1).   If  the tenure-holder  

files  objections  to  such   statement,  the  Prescribed  Authority  

then proceeds to determine the surplus land under Section 12.  

In the present case, the exercise contemplated under Section  

10(1)  and  (2)  has  not  at  all  been  done  by  the  Prescribed  

Authority. Neither any statement under C.L.H. Form 3 has been  

prepared  under  Section  10(1)  nor  any  notice  under  Section  

10(2)  along  with  such  statement  has  been  served  upon  the  

appellants. The notice dated January 24, 2002 is a notice under  

Section 9(2) simplicitor and not a notice under Section 10(2) at  

all.

29.  Section 12 contemplates proceedings  pursuant  to  

a notice to the tenure-holder under sub-Section (2) of Section  

10 or sub-Section (2) of Section 11 or because of any appellate  

order under Section 13 and then determination of the surplus  

land by the Prescribed Authority after   objections have been  

filed by the tenure-holder to such notice. There has been no  

notice  issued  to  the  appellants  by  the  Prescribed  Authority  

under sub-Section (2) of Section 10 nor any notice  came to be  

issued to the appellants under sub-Section (2) of Section 11.  

18

The  matter was also not taken up by the Prescribed Authority  

because  of  any  appellate  order  under  Section  13.   The  

appellants  filed  their  objections   to  the  notice  under  Section  

9(2).   In  the  circumstances,  therefore,  the  order  dated  

December  17,  2003  cannot  be  held  to  be  an  order  under  

Section 12. It  is neither an order under Section 11(2) nor an  

order under Section 12 but  plainly an order canceling notice  

issued  under Section 9(2) after objections were filed  by the  

appellants.  

30. Significantly in the matters of future acquisition, the  

procedure as  provided  in sections 9 to 12 has to be followed  

as well.  

31. Section  13  provides  a  right  of  appeal  to  a  party  

aggrieved by an order under sub-Section (2) of Section 11 or  

Section 12 and no other.  In other words, any order passed by  

the Prescribed Authority other than the order under-Section (2)  

of  Section  11  or  Section  12  is  not  appealable.  From  any  

reckoning,  the order dated December 17,  2003 is neither an  

order under sub-Section (2) of Section 11 nor an order under  

Section  12.    Act  1960  does  not   make  the  order  of  the  

19

Prescribed Authority canceling the notice issued under Section  

9(2) amenable to appeal.  Such order does not fall  within the  

ambit of Section 13.  The position is no different for the orders  

passed by the prescribed authority  in other nine matters.  

32. The High Court held that appeals were maintainable  

because    notice under Section 9(2) is  akin to a notice under  

Section 10 and if the matter is disputed by either party and the  

Prescribed Authority adjudicates the dispute either in favour of  

State or tenure-holder, the order falls under Section 11(2) and,  

therefore, appealable under Section 13.  The reasoning  of the  

High Court  is fallacious for more than one reason. In the first  

place, it is not correct  to say that notice under Section 9(2) is  

akin to a notice under Section 10 of the Act.  In the next place,  

Section 10 applies where pursuant to the notice under Section  

9, the tenure-holder fails to submit a statement or submits any  

incomplete or incorrect statement and the Prescribed Authority  

causes  a  statement  prepared  in  the  prescribed  form  

(C.L.H.Form-3)  and  then  issues  a  notice  upon  such  tenure-

holder together with a copy of statement so prepared in C.L.H.  

Form-3  to  show cause  why  that  statement  be  not  taken  as  

20

correct.  We have already noticed that in the present case, the  

exercise required under  Section 10(1)  and (2)  has not  at  all  

been done by the Prescribed Authority. In the circumstances,  

the  orders  passed  by  the  Prescribed  Authority   neither  fall  

under Section 11(2) nor Section 12 of the Act, 1960.         

33. For  the  foregoing  reasons,  these  appeals  must  

succeed and are allowed. The impugned judgment of the High  

Court as well  as that of the Additional Commissioner are set  

aside.  It  is,  however,   clarified  that  it  will  be  open  to  the  

Respondent No. 1 to assail the legality and correctness of the  

order  passed  by  the   Prescribed  Authority  in  appropriate  

proceedings as may be advised and in that event the period  

from the date of  the filing appeals by the Respondent No. 1  

before  the Additional  Commissioner,  Meerut  Division,  Meerut  

until date shall not come in their way in pursuing  such remedy.  

Parties will bear their own costs.  

……………………J            (Tarun Chatterjee)

…….……………..J           (R. M. Lodha)

New Delhi September 17, 2009.

21