JUDGMENT : K. Ramamurthy, Member. - This is an appeal under Section 33(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 against the order dated 4-1-1983 passed in Urban Ceiling Case No. 19/76. 2. The appellant has raised two issues. He first says that the area in plot Nos. 1996 and 1997 are water-logged. He relies on 54(1982) C. L. T. 111 in which it has been held that such water-logged land should not be treated as vacant land. Secondly, he says plot Nos. 2136, 2137 and 2138 measuring 1.058 acres, half of it belonging to him, cannot be used for homestead purpose. He says that there is a public road. Plot Nos. 2136 and 2138 measuring Ac.0.178.5 and 0 377 are agricultural land and as such should be exempted from Urban Land Ceiling. He further says that there are 3 tanks in these two plots measuring 300 decimals. He concludes by saying that if these are excluded, he has no surplus land. 3. Standing Counsel argues that Competent Authority found that the plots were water-logged. But he also noticed that there is rapid development of buildings around this plot. As such he refused to concede that this is unsuitable for building construction. 4. Standing Counsel further points out that the Competent Authority did not notice any tank in these plots. There was no such claim by a appellant in the Competent Authority's Court. He further points out that there is no public road. It is a private road. The Master Plan mentions these two plots as a residential zone and not agricultural land. 5. I am inclined to agree with the Standing Counsel on both these points. Competent Authority is correct in finding that rapid housing development is taking place around the disputed plots. As such it cannot be said that it is unfit for housing. 6. Over Ac.1.00 of land cannot be treated as public road. It is private road. The plea about tanks is belated and therefore not credible. The land may Be agricultural land, but as Master Plan declares it as Residential Zone, this cannot be excluded from the computation of ceiling land. 7. I would, therefore, reject the appeal and uphold the order of the Competent Authority. 8. Appeal rejected. Final Result : Dismissed