A. P. RAVANI, J. ( 1 ) NOT the integrated whole of the person but different disintegrated component parts of the person be recognised as separate entity and he served with a show-cause notice and be afforded an opportunity of being heard. Such is the plea raised by the petitioners who are different component parts of an association of individuals a person. Can such a plea be upheld ? ( 2 ) THE petitioners along with respondent No. 3 purchased a piece of vacant land situated within the Urban agglomeration area of Rajkot. The land admeasured about 13861 sq. m. It appears that the land was purchased some time in the year 1966 by a registered sale deed executed in favour of petitioners and respondent No. 3. After the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976 came into force respondent No. 3 filled in form under the provisions of Sec. 6 (1) of the Act. In the form it was declared that the form was filled in on behalf of himself and on behalf of the petitioners. In the facts and circumstances of the case it was treated by the Competent Authority that the form was filled in by an association of individuals and respondent No. 3 throughout the proceedings represented the association of individuals. After serving the draft statement under Sec. 8 (3) upon respondent No. 3 and after considering the objections and after affording an opportunity of being heard the Competent Authority came to the conclusion that the land was purchased jointly by respondent No. 3 and all these petitioners; that there were no defined shares in respect of each of the owners. Therefore it was treated as an association of individuals and it was treated as one person. On this basis it was held that such an association of individuals was entitled to retain one ceiling unit i. e. 1500 sq. m. of land. Rest of the land i. e. 12361 sq. m. was declared as surplus. The aforesaid order was passed by the Competent Authority on 26/06/1984 and the same is produced at annexure-A to the petition. The association of individuals as such did not prefer appeal. Respondent No. 3 who had filled in the form on behalf of the association of individuals also did not join in filing the appeal. m. was declared as surplus. The aforesaid order was passed by the Competent Authority on 26/06/1984 and the same is produced at annexure-A to the petition. The association of individuals as such did not prefer appeal. Respondent No. 3 who had filled in the form on behalf of the association of individuals also did not join in filing the appeal. ( 3 ) THE petitioners in their individual capacity and not as association of individuals filed appeal against the order passed by the Competent Authority. The appeal has been rejected by the Urban Land Tribunal as per its order dated 25/11/1986 The appellate Tribunal held that the land was in residential zone and the same cannot be treated as agricultural land; that the land was purchased by an association of individuals and it was not necessary that all the appellants should have been served with a show-cause notice and should have been given an opportunity of being heard by the Competent Authority. The contention of the petitioners that each one of them should have been given one unit has not been accepted by the Appellate Tribunal. The petitioners have preferred this petition challenging the legality and validity of the aforesaid order. ( 4 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners mainly contended that the petitioners ought to have been afforded an opportunity of being heard by the Competent Authority in view of the provisions of Rule 5 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Rules 1976 The relevant provision of the Rule which is relied upon by the petitioners reads as follows:"5 (1) Every draft statement prepared under sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 8 shall contain the particulars specified in Form III. (2) (a) The draft statement shall be served together with the notice referred to in sub-sec. (3) of Sec. 8 on (I) the holder of the vacant lands and (II) all other persons so far as may be known who have or are likely to have any claim to or interest in the ownership or possession or both of the vacant lands. by sending the same by registered post addressed to the person concerned; (I) in the case of the holder of the vacant lands; to his address as given in the statement filed in pursuance of sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 6 and; (II) in the case of other persons at their last known address. by sending the same by registered post addressed to the person concerned; (I) in the case of the holder of the vacant lands; to his address as given in the statement filed in pursuance of sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 6 and; (II) in the case of other persons at their last known address. "it is well settled principle of interpretation of statutes that any provision of the statute is required to be interpreted having regard to the entire provision of the Act as well as the Rules. The Rules framed under the Act cannot be interpreted so as to frustrate the object of the Act or to make working of the Act impracticable or impossible. This is what is known as rule of harmoneous construction. This basic canon of construction of statutes is required to be borne in mind while dealing with the contention raised by the petitioners. ( 5 ) THE object of the Act is to curb certain activities in vacant lands situated within the urban agglomeration area. With a view to achieving this object the Act provides that no person shall hold vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit as specified with respect to different towns mentioned in the schedule appended to the Act. The ceiling limit is prescribed in relation to a person. Person is defined in the Act. One gets the definition of holder of land also if the definition of the phrase to hold is taken into consideration. For the purposes of interpreting the provisions of Rule 5 relevant part of which is extracted hereinabove it is necessary to look at the definition of the term person to hold and the provisions of Secs. 3 4 10 and Sec. 33 of the Act. The term person is defined as follows in Sec. 2 (i) of the Act. " (I)"person includes an individual a family a firm a company or an association or body of individuals whether incorporated or not. 3 4 10 and Sec. 33 of the Act. The term person is defined as follows in Sec. 2 (i) of the Act. " (I)"person includes an individual a family a firm a company or an association or body of individuals whether incorporated or not. "the phrase to hold is defined in Sec. 2 (1) of the Act which reads as follows: (1) to hold with its grammatical variations in relation to any vacant land means (I) to own such land; or (II) to possess such land as owner or as tenant or as mortgagee or under an irrevocable power of attorney or under a hire purchase agreement or partly in one of the said capacities and partly in any other of the said capacity or capacities. "section 3 of the Act provides that on and from the commencement of the Act no person shall be entitled to hold any vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit. Section 4 of the Act prescribes ceiling limit with respect to different urban agglomeration areas falling in different categories namely category (A) (B) (C) and (D) which have been mentioned in Schedule I to the Act. Section 6 of the Act enjoins duty upon every person holding vacant land in excess of ceiling limit at the time of commencement of the Act to file a statement before the Competent Authority specifying the necessary particulars with regard to the vacant land as may be prescribed. Section 8 of the Act requires the Competent Authority after considering the form to prepare draft statement and to serve the same upon the concerned person and call upon him to file objections if any within 30 daws of the service of the notice. After considering the objections the Competent Authority is required to issue final statement 85 provided under Sec. 9 of the Act. Section 10 of the Act provides for issuance of a notification for acquisition and vesting of the land in the Government. After the notification under Sec. 10 (1) of the Act is issued the persons interested in the land can prefer their claim and the same are required to be considered by the Competent Authority under Sec. 10 (2) of the Act. Sub-sec. (5) of the Sec. 10 provides for service of notice upon the holder of the land for obtaining vacant possession of the land by the Government. Sub-sec. (5) of the Sec. 10 provides for service of notice upon the holder of the land for obtaining vacant possession of the land by the Government. Sec. 33 of the Act provides for appeal by any person aggrieved against certain orders passed by the Competent Authority under the provisions of the Act. ( 6 ) IT is admitted position that respondent No. 3 who had filled in the form in respect of this land had not filled the form in his individual capacity. He had filled in the form for and on behalf of an association of individuals. In the form he has specifically written: . He has taken part in the proceedings for and on behalf of the association of individuals. Names of the petitioners have been shown in column 14 in part B of the form as members of the association. From time to time when the hearing was fixed before the Competent Authority respondent No. 3 appeared and made submissions. Thus the person who hell the land i. e. the association of individuals was represented before the Competent Authority. The person was given an opportunity of being heard. The person did make representation. The Competent Authority considered all the objections raised and submissions made before it and thereafter passed the order. It is interesting to note that this person i. e. association of individuals did not prefer appeal. Appeal before the Urban Land Tribunal was preferred by the different individuals who formed the association of individuals. Respondent No. 3 who had represented the association of individuals did not join with them in filing the appeal. Therefore he was joined as respondent No. 2 before the Urban Land Tribunal. He has also not joined himself in filing the petition. Therefore in this petition he has been joined as respondent No. 3. ( 7 ) IT is not the case of the petitioners that respondent No. 3 had no authority to represent the association of individuals. The association of individuals was the person which held the land. As a matter of fact respondent No. 3 represented the person holding the land i. e. association of individuals. The person who held the land has been given an opportunity of being heard. The association of individuals was the person which held the land. As a matter of fact respondent No. 3 represented the person holding the land i. e. association of individuals. The person who held the land has been given an opportunity of being heard. It is true that respondent No. 3 did request the Competent Authority that other members of the association of individuals may also be afforded an opportunity of being heard. It seems that this request was not acceded to by the Competent Authority. ( 8 ) IN the aforesaid factual back-ground and in view of the provisions of law mentioned hereinabove provisions of Rule 5 are required to be interpreted. Sub-clause (1) of Rule 5 enjoins duty upon. The Competent Authority to fill in the particulars specified in Form III while preparing the statement under Sec. 8 (1) of the Act. This statement is required to be served upon the person mentioned in sub-clause (2) of the Rule. This relevant part of sub-clause (2) has been referred to herainabove. Analysing the aforesaid provisions of the Rule the following position emerges: (1) The draft statement should be accompanied by the notice referred to in Sec. 8 of the Act; (2 ). It should be served upon: (I) the holder in the vacant land; and (II) to other persons known to have or likely to have any claim or interest in the ownership or possession or both in the vacant land; (3) The notice is required to be served by registered post to the person concerned. "the aforesaid provisions of the Rule enjoins duty upon the Competent Authority to serve notice upon the holder of the vacant land as well as upon the persons other than the holder of the land. The persons other than the holder of the land should have claim or interest in the ownership or possession of the vacant land. This is required to be done by sending a communication by registered post addressed to the person concerned. The words holder all other persons and to the person concerned are very much important in the aforesaid part of the Rule. The Rule does not cast a duty upon the Competent Authority to serve notice on each and every separate and individual component part of which the person is constituted. The words holder all other persons and to the person concerned are very much important in the aforesaid part of the Rule. The Rule does not cast a duty upon the Competent Authority to serve notice on each and every separate and individual component part of which the person is constituted. If the person be it a holder of the land or any other person having claim or interest in the land is before the Competent Authority then separate individual component parts of that person are not required to be served. All that is required to be seen by the Competent Authority is that the person may be a holder of the land or any other persons who may be having claim or interest in the land are properly served. ( 9 ) AT this stage we may have a look at the definition of person. It is an inclusive definition The term person includes: (1) an individual (2) a family (3) a firm (4) a company or (5) an association or body of individuals incorporated or not. Section 6 of the Act casts duty upon every person holding vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit to fill in the form Under Sec. 8 (1) of the Act the Competent Authority is required to make enquiry and prepare a draft statement in respect of the person who has filled in the statement under Sec. 6. Section 8 (3) of the Act inter alia provides that the draft statement shall be served on the person concerned. Reading the provisions of Sec. 8 (1) and (3) together with the provisions of Rule 5 (2) bearing in mind the definition of the words to hold and person it becomes abundantly clear that the notice is required to be given under Rule 5 (2) to other persons also who may not have filled in the form. This eventually will arise in cases where such `other persons may have any claim or interest in the ownership or possession of the land in question at the time of commencement of the Act. Once the person either holder of the vacant land or any other person claiming interest in the ownership or possession on the land at the time of commencement of the Act is served with notice under Sec. 8 (3) of the Act the duty cast upon the Competent Authority is over. Once the person either holder of the vacant land or any other person claiming interest in the ownership or possession on the land at the time of commencement of the Act is served with notice under Sec. 8 (3) of the Act the duty cast upon the Competent Authority is over. It is not the obligation of the Competent Authority to direct the person tn its different component parts and then serve notice upon such and every such part of which the person is constituted. ( 10 ) THE petitioners are different individuals. But they are not other persons as far as the enquiry in respect of the land in question is concerned. Fifteen different individuals purchased the land. All these fifteen different individuals taken together fall within the definition of person given in Sec. 2 (i) of the Act. All of them taken together formed an association of individuals. Therefore as an association or body of individuals they are one person though they may be different individuals. Simply because they are different individuals who have formed an association or body of individuals each different individual is not required to be heard either under the provisions of the Act or under the provisions of the Rule This is the only reasonable interpretation which can be given to the relevant provisions of the Act and Rule 5. ( 11 ) NOW let us test the interpretation canvassed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners. It is an admitted position that the petitioners are forming part of an association of individuals which is a person. If each part of this person is required to be afforded an opportunity of being heard then both the provisions of the Act as well as the provisions of the Rule will have to be read so as to mean that in cases wherever a person as defined in the Act is capable of being identified in the form of separate individuals each separate individual i. e. each and every separate component part of the person should also be afforded an opportunity of being heard. This would not only be against common sense but would also lead to impracticable and impossible situations. ( 12 ) TAKE the case of family. This would not only be against common sense but would also lead to impracticable and impossible situations. ( 12 ) TAKE the case of family. As defined in the Act in relation to a person it means the individuals the wife or husband as the case may be of such individual and their unmarried minor children. It is evident that family though is to be considered one person would consist of different individuals. Similarly in case of a firm it would surely consist of more than one individual. Different individuals would be forming part of the person called the firm. In that way there will be innumerable members of a company. All the individual share-holders who become members of the company taken together form the company in accordance with law. But each and every component of a family or of a firm or that of a company cannot be called other persons. If a family or a firm or a company is a person holding vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit all that is required to be seen by the Competent Authority is that the family the firm or the company as the case may be is served with notice under Sec. 8 (3) of the Act and it is not necessary for the Competent Authority to serve notice upon each and every seperate component part of the family the firm or the company as the case may be. Similarly in case of an association of individuals once that association of individuals is before the Competent Authority and the same is represented properly it is not necessary for the Competent Authority to serve each and every separate component part of that person called association of individuals. If this interpretation is not given and the interpretation as canvassed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is accepted it would lead to absurdity. In case of a company having innumerable number of members (share holders) notice under Sec. 8 (3) of the Act can never be served upon each and every such component part of the person called Company. Interpretation which makes the rule workable and which does not result into absurdity has to be adopted. In case of a company having innumerable number of members (share holders) notice under Sec. 8 (3) of the Act can never be served upon each and every such component part of the person called Company. Interpretation which makes the rule workable and which does not result into absurdity has to be adopted. ( 13 ) IN view of the aforesaid discussion it may be noted that under Sec. 33 of the Act an appeal can be preferred by any person aggrieved by an order made by the Competent Authority. Thus Sec. 33 does not provide that each and every separate component part of a person aggrieved can also file an appeal. However this is not the question before me. The Urban Land Tribunal did not entertain the appeal and the appeal preferred by the petitioners has been rejected on merits. The contention of the petitioners that they ought to have been given an opportunity of being heard by the Competent Authority has been rejected. In view of the aforesaid discussion neither the Competent Authority nor the appellate Tribunal has committed any error much less error apparent on the face of the record. The Urban Land Tribunal has rightly held on merits that each separate individuals was not entitled to have one single unit separately. ( 14 ) THE petition is essentially under Art. 227 of the Constitution. There is no error much less van error apparent on the face of the record. No other contention is raised. There is no substance in the petition. Hence rejected. Ad-interim relief granted earlier on February 19 1987 stands vacated. Notice discharged. Rule discharged. .