Holding

Section 13 permits appeal only against orders under Section 11(2) or Section 12; a cancellation of a Section 9(2) notice is not appealable.

Summary

The Prescribed Authority under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 issued a notice under Section 9(2) requiring Super Cassettes Industries Ltd to submit details of its land holdings. The company objected, claiming the land was non‑agricultural and the notice was inapplicable; the authority subsequently cancelled the notice on December 17, 2003. The State of Uttar Pradesh filed appeals under Section 13 of the Act, contending that the cancellation order was appealable. The High Court held the appeals maintainable, but the Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme and held that Section 13 confers a right of appeal only against orders under Section 11(2) or Section 12, not against a cancellation of a Section 9(2) notice. Consequently, the appeals were not maintainable and were set aside. The Court clarified that the right of appeal is not inherent and must be expressly provided by statute.

Issues considered

The scope of Section 13 of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 with respect to the right of appeal.
Whether an order cancelling a notice issued under Section 9(2) is appealable under Section 13.
Whether a notice under Section 9(2) can be treated as akin to a notice under Section 10 for the purpose of appealability.
Whether a mere omission in citing the statutory provision affects the maintainability of an appeal.

Legislation cited

Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960s. 10, s. 11, s. 12, s. 13, s. 9(2)
Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950

Subjects

right of appealstatutory interpretationSection 13Section 9 noticemaintainability of appealland ceilingcivil appeal

Judgment

[2009) 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 627

M/S. SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LIMITED A
v.
}·
STATE OF U.P. & ANR.
(Civil Appeal No. 3058 of 2008 etc.)

SEPTEMBER 17, 2009
B
[TARUN CHATTERJEE AND R.M. LODHA, JJ.]

Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings
Act, 1960 - s. 13 - Appeal under - Maintainability of - Held:
Appeal uls. 13 is maintainable only against order u/ss. 11 (2) c
and 12 - In the instant case, order appealed against was u/s.
9(2), hence appeal not maintainable.

Appeal - Right of appeal - Held: Such right is not a
natural or inherent right - Remedy of appeal to be traceable D
to statutory provisions - Mere omission in quoting the
"f provision, not to affect maintainability of appeal, if the
impugned order, otherwise is amenable to appeal.

Prescribed authority under U.P. Imposition of Ceiling
on Land Holdings Act, 1960, issued a notice u/s. 9(2) of E
the Act, calling upon the appellants to file details of land
held by them in Ceiling Land Holding Form No. 2.
Appyllants objected to the notice. Prescribed authority
• cancelled the notice holding that it was not applicable to
--4
the land in question, as the same was not agricultural F
,... land. State Government filed appeals u/s. 13 of the Act.
Appellants raised objection to the maintainability of the
appeals, which was overruled by the appellate authority
and held the appeal as maintainable. In writ petition, High
...
Court upheld the view of the appellate authority. Hence G
the present appeals.
"J Allowing the appeals, the Court

627 .H
628 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A HELD: 1. 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
B in quoting the provisions would not affect the
maintainability of appeal, if otherwise, the order impugned
is amenable to appeal. [Para 25] [641-A-B]

D.N. Taneja v. Bhajan Lal 1988 (3) SCC 26; V.C. Shukla
v. State through C.B.I. 1980 suppl sec 92, relied on.
c
2.1. Section 13 of Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling
on Land Holdings Act, 1960, 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. Any order
D passed by the Prescribed Authority other than the order
under-Section (2) of Section 11 or Section 12 is not y
appealable. From any reckoning, the order of prescribed
authority is neither an order under sub-Section (2) of
Section 11 nor an order under Section 12. The Act does
E not make the order of tile Prescribed authority canceling
the notice issued under Section 9(2) amenable to appeal.
Such order doe• 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. [Para 31) [643- )--

F D-F] ...
2.2. The -High Court held that appeals were
maintainable because notice u/s. 9(2) is akin to a notice
u/s. 10 and if the matter is disputed by either party and
the Prescribed authority adjudicates the dispute either in
G favour of State or tenure-holder, the order falls under
Section 11 (2) and, therefore, appealable uls. 13. The
reasoning of the High Court is fallacious for more than
-I ·-
one reason. In the first place, it is not correct to say that
notice uls. 9(2) is akin to a notice u/s. 10 of the Act. In the
H
SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. 629
STATE OF U.P. & ANR.
next place, Section 10 applies where pursuant to the A
> 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 B
together with a copy of statement so prepared in C.L.H.
Form-3 to show cause why that statement be not taken
as correct. 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 c
passed by the Prescribed authority neither fall u/s. 11 (2)
nor Section 12 of the Act. [Para 32] [643-F-H; 644-A-C]
Case Law Reference:
1988 (3) sec 26 Relied on. Para 24 o
1980 suppl sec 92 Relied on. Para 24
.. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No .
3058 of 2008.
E
From the Judgment & Order dated 24.5.2007 of the High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad in C.M. W.P. No. 47151 of
2004.

WITH
F
C.A. Nos. 3068, 3085, 3089, 3165, 3086, 3082, 3066, 3071,
3197 of 2008.

S.R. Singh, S.C. Mishra, Amit Sibal, Sunil Fernandes, P.V.
Yogeswaran, Rahul Ajat Shatru, Rajat Jariwal, Shrish Kumar G
Misra, Garvesh Kabra, Ravindra Kumar for the appearing
parties.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

R.M. LODHA, J. 1. This batch of ten appeals by special H
630 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A 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.
B
2. It is not necessary to refer to the facts of each appeal I

as narration of facts in Civil Appeal No. 3058 of 2008 would
suffice for deciding the controversy raised in this group of
appeals.
c 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
D Land Holding Form No. 2 (for short, 'CLH Form-2') along with
enclosures within a period of thirty days from the date of notice. y

4. Pursuant to the aforesaid notice under Section 9(2), the
appellants submitted its reply on February 21, 2002 raising
diverse objectio.ns, inter aliC1: (1) that notice under.Section 9(2)
E
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 separat~ J..

F sale deeds dated March 3, 1987; March 10, 'i907 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, ~

G 1960. In the statement submitted by the appellant in C.L.H.
Form,.,2, it was stated urider every column 'not applicable'.
-
l-
§, On May 23_, 2002, the Prescribed Authority called upon
the appellants to submit the details of each khata holders
H separately along with the chart.
'"
'

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. 631
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. [R.M. LODHA, J.]

> 6. On June 4, 2002, the appellants, pursuant to the order A
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 B
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 as industrial/abadi. He ordered that necessary
endorsement to the said effect be made in the revenue record.
c
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 D
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
E
passed by the Prescribed Authority were not appealable.

• 10. The Additionr.I Commissioner (Administration), Meerut
-f Division (Appellate Authority) took up all the ten appeals
together and, after hearing the parties, by his order dated
....
'
F
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.

11. The appellants challenged the order of the Additional G
':';_ Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut by filing writ petitions
before the High Court.

12. The Single Judge heard the parties and vide judgment
:lnd order dated May· 24, 2007 held that the view of the
H
632 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A 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
B
of the Act, 1960 aggrieved by the orders passed by the I

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,
c 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
connected therewith; the main objective of the Act, 1960 being
D to provide for more equitable distribution of land by making the
r
same available to the extent possible to landless agricultural
y-
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
E 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. >
,...;.
F 'Holding' under Section 3(9) means the land or lahds held
by a person as a bhumidar, sirdar, asami ofGaoh 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
G as a Government lessee, or as a sub-lessee of a Government
µ'
lessee, where the period of the sub-lease is co-extensive with
the period of the lease. -·-
'Prescribed authority' under Section 3(13) means such
officer not below the rank of an Assistant Collector of the first
H
SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. 633
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. [R.M. LODHA, J.]

class as may be empowered by the State Government, by A
.notification in the Gaiette, 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
B
tenure-holder in excess of the ceiling area applicable to him,
arid includes any btiildings, wells and trees existing thereon.

'T~nure-holder:' under Section 3(17) means a person who
is the holder of a holding, but [except in Chapter Ill] does not
include- c
(a) a woman whose husband is a tenure-holder;

(b) a minor child whose father or mother is a tenure-
holder.
D
16·. Section 5 imposes ceiling on land holdings from the
appointed date and further mandates that no tenure-holder shall
be entitled to hold iri the aggregate any land in excess of ceiling
area applicable to him throughout Uttar Pradesh.
E
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
-1-.
general notice to tenure-holders holding land in excess of
ceiling area for submission of statement in respect thereof. It F
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 G
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 H
634 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A 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
B applicabl~ 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 ..t
like general notice, call upon every tenure-holder holding
c 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 publicatio!'l of such notice a statement referred to in sub-
section (1):

D [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
E statement referred to in sub-section (1) or any information
pertaining thereto.];
;...
[(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-
F 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-

G (a) held by him and the members of his family on
January 24, 1971; .r
(b) acquired or disposed of by him or by members of
his family between January 24, 1971 and October
10, 1975.]
H
<

;.
SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. 635
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. [R.M. LODHA, J.]
3. Where the tenure-holders' wife holds any land which is A
> 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 B
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 c
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 D
-... 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 E
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 F
to be served upon every such tenure-holder in such rryanner
as may be prescribed, a notice together with a copy 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 G
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 H
. >
;
636 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A 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 ;js not disputed within the
specified period, the Prescribed Authority shall
accordingly determine the surplus land of the tenure-holder. .\
B
(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

c
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.

D (3) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) and
Section 13, the order of the Prescribed At.:thority shall be ~

final and conclusive and be not questioned in any court of
law. ,.,
12. Determination of the surplus land by the Prescribed
E
Authority where an objection is fi/ed.-(1) Where an
objectiqn 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
F opportunity of being heard and of producing evidence, I
~

decide the objections after recording his reasons, and
determine the surplus land.

(2) Subject to any appellate order under Section 13, the
G order of the Prescribed Authority under sub-section (1 ):i
shall be final and conclusive and be not questioned in any
court of law. 5
13. Appeals-_(1) Any party aggrieved by an order under
sub-sectio·n (2) of Section 11 or Section 12, may, within
H
SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. 637
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. [R.M. LODHA, J.]
thirty days of the date of the order, prefer an appeal to the A
[Commissioner] within whose jurisdiction the land or any
part thereof is situate.

(2) The [Commission~r] shall dispose of the appeal
as expeditiously as possible and his decision thereon shaU B
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 c
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 D
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 E
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 F
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 G
..... provides for determination of surplus land regarding future
A
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 H
638 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A (Amendment) Act, 1972-
-A

(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
B
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
c 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 .....
D 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 [* * j under Section 29, the tenure-
E 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. c+-
F
(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
G required to be submitted under sub-section (1) or submits
an incomplete or incorrect statement the Prescribed ,-1-
,_;.

Authority shall proceed in the manner laid down under
Section 10.

H (c) The provisions of this Act in respect of
SUPER CASSEITES INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. 639
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. [R.M. LODHA, J.]
declaration, acquisition, disposal and settlement of surplus A
~
land, shall, mutatis mutandis, apply to surplus land covered
by this section."

21. In exercise of the powers conferred under Act, 1960
r rules have been framed called Uttar Pradesh Imposition on
B
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.
c
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. D
~ Fonn 1 ir. the official Gazette, the Prescribed Authority shall
~ause io 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
E
C.L.H. Form 3, prepared under Rule 6 calling upon ~im 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 F
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 G
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
H
640 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.} S.C.R.

A 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.]"

23. Rule 12 provides that objections filed under Sections ~
B
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 La/1, a three-Judge Bench
of this Court observed that the question whether there is right
c 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.P., this Court while dealing with the submission that right
of appeal should be liberally construed referred to the
......
D observations of Crawford : The Construction of Statute~.
"..... 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:
E
"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. ~ ~

F the 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
G construed to contain a right of appeal even against an
interlocutory order and, therefore, the present clause falls
_i~
within the last part of the statement of the Crawf9rd-,

1. (1988) 3 sec 2s.
H 2. 19ao suppl sec 92.
SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. 641
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. [R.M. LODHA, J.]
extracted above". A
>
25. It Js 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 B
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 c
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 D
~
January 24, 2002 under Section 9(2) of the Act, 1960 that they
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/
E
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
F
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 G
~,
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 H
642 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A Sections 9, 10, 11 and 12 is that once the Prescribed Authority
issues general notice to tenure-holders or specific notice to a -4..
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 ...
B 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
c 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
D
provision contemplates tenure-holder to be given at least 1O
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 order is an order
E 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 ,,' .,.#
F 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 appeilants. The notice dated January
24, 2002 is a notice under Section 9(2) simplicitor and not a
notice under Section 10(2) at all.
G
29. Section 12 contemplates proceedings pursuant to a
notice to the tenure-holder under sub-Section (2) of Section 1O >
~
or sub-Section (2) of Section 11 or because of any appellate
order under Section 13 and then determination of the surplus
H land by the Prescribed Authority after objections have been
SUPER CASSETIES INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. 643
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. [R.M. LODHA, J.]

filed by the tenure-holder to such notice. There has been no A
> 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. The
matter was also not taken up by the Prescribed Authority
because of any appellate order under Section 13. The B
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 c
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.
D
.... 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 E
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
Prescribed Authority canceling the notice issued under Section
~
9(2) amenable to appeal. Such order does not fall within the F
... 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 1Oand if the matter is disputed by either party and the G
Prescribed Authority adjudicates the dispute either in favour of
.. i 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 H
644 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A 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
B (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
correct. We have already noticed that in the present case, the
exercise required under Section 10(1) and (2) has not at all ....
c 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
sueceed and are allowed. The impugned judgment of the High
D 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
ord~r- passed by the Prescribed Authority in appropriate
proceedings as may be advised and in that event the period
E 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.
-~

F K.K.T. Appeals allowed. ,.