JUDGMENT K.C. Agrawal, J. - Having heard counsel for the parties : I am of the opinion that the judgment of the District Judge in so far as it excluded the covered area measuring 1124.90 sq. metres from the vacant land is erroneous. The Supreme Court has laid down in State of U.P. v. L.J. Johnson, AIR 1963, SC 1303, that for calculating the vacant land, land covered by construction would also be taken into account. Accordingly this direction of the District Judge is incorrect. 2. The second point in dispute before the District Judge was with regard to 2.76 acres 4 Karia of plot no. 1/1 in Mohalla Daud Chak. Respondent no. 2 claimed it to be agricultural plot and prayed for exemption of this area under Section 2 (9) (B). The claim of the State of U.P., however, was that since this land had been shown in the Master Plan for use other than agriculture, the correct provision to be applied was Section 2(o)(C). The learned District Judge has remanded the case back to the Competent Authority for deciding the question of applicability of Section 2 (C) after looking into the relevant papers. With regard to remand, I do not find any illegality accordingly. I am not prepared to set it aside. 3. In the result, the writ petition succeeds partly and is allowed and the judgment of the District Judge in so far as be excluded 1124.90 sq. metres from vacant land is set aside. In other respects the judgment is maintained. No order as to costs.