B. C. VARMA, J. ( 1 ) THE Jabalpur Development Authority (respondent No. 1) initiated a housing scheme No. 15. This scheme came into force from 11-9-1984. It embraced lands in village Baitla, district Jabalpur. Before, however, the scheme could be for mulated and finally published, the petitioner, which is a housing co-operative society, had already entered into an agreement with the holders, Smt. Gangubai Gaikwad and others, for development of the land comprised in that scheme. The petitioner, therefore, requested the Jabalpur Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the 'j. D. A. ') to release only that part of the land from the scheme No. 15, in respect of which the petitioner had entered into an agreement with Smt. Gangubai. After some negotiations, the J. D. A. agreed that in lieu of cash price to be paid as compensation for acquisition of the land to Smt. Gangubai it shall lease out an area to the extent of 20 per cent of the plots in favour of Smt. Gangubai or her nominee. The total area to be so leased out comes to 1,08,028 sq. ft. Further, by an agreement dated 22-9-1983, the J. D. A. entered into an agreement with the petitioner-society to permit it to carry development work as per approved layout. The work to be carried out by the petitioner society was as follows :-" (A) Construction of WBM road and subsequent tar roads. (b) Construction of pucca drains on both sides of the roads. (c) Construction of culverts wherever necessary. (d) Agriculture and development of park, open space, etc. (e) Road side electrification. The agreement further stipulated that after allotment of plots to Smt. Gangubai as per agreement entered into between her and the J. D. A. in lieu of compensation for acquisition of her land, the remaining plots shall be leased out to the petitioner-society on usual terms and conditions, the consideration being the development work to be carried out as per agreement. It was further stipulated that the plots shall be leased out only after the society completed the development work and obtained the necessary certificate from the J. D. A. It also appears from the averments in the petition that subsequently the J. D. A. agreed to lease out to the nominee of Smt. Gangubai even those plots, which were to be leased out to the holder, Gangubai, in lieu of compensation. The petitioner further contends that it has carried out the development work as per the layout supplied to it by the J. D. A. and under its supervision at a heavy cost. On the development work being so completed, the petitioner required the J. D. A. to issue completion certificate. By letter dated 28-8-1986, (Annexure P-11), the J. D. A. required the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 3,40,994. 00, as detailed in para 11 of the petition. Finally, the following decision was arrived at between the petitioner and the J. D. A. in a meeting held on 31-10-1986 :-utimately, the completion certificate (Annexure P-7) was issued in favour of the petitioner. A demand for Rs. 18,332. 25 was, however, raised and the petitioner deposited that amount on 13-3-1987. Later, the petitioner furnished the drafts of lease deeds to be executed in favour of 48 members of the society in respect of the plots so carved out and to be leased out to the members of the petitioner-society in terms of the agreement referred to above. The J. D. A. , however, failed to execute the lease deeds and to get them registered. Possession of the plots has also not been given to the allottees (members of the petitioner-society ). It appears from the averments in the petition that the J. D. A. feels embarrassed in not honouring the agreement entered into between the petitioner-society, holder of the land, itself, for reason of pendency of a revenue case No. 1-90/ B-9 of 1984-85, under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, against the holder Smt. Gangubai. It also appears that the State Government is moved for exempting the vacant land held by Smt. Gangubai and acquired by the J. D. A. from operation of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, in terms of Sec. 20 thereof. The State Government has taken no decision upon that application yet and the J. D. A. appears to be awaiting such a decision before honouring theagreement in favour of Smt. Gangubai and the petitioner-society, referred to above. The State Government has taken no decision upon that application yet and the J. D. A. appears to be awaiting such a decision before honouring theagreement in favour of Smt. Gangubai and the petitioner-society, referred to above. There is an averment in the petition that while the lease deeds are not being executed in favour of the members of the petitioner-society, pursuant to the agreement (Annexure P-7), the J. D. A. has executed lease deeds and allotted 32 plots to the nominees of Smt. Gangubai, as per agreement between her and J. D. A. (Annexure P-6 ). This is in spite of the pendency of the proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. The petitioner, therefore, alleges that on development of the plots acquired by the J. D. A. , the J. D. A. is bound to execute lease deeds in favour of the petitioner-society or its members, per agreement (Annexure P-7 ). The pendency of the proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, can possibly cause no hindrance to the execution of these lease deeds. This is particularly so, when the lease deeds in respect of certain plots have been executed in favour of certain other persons, i. e. , the nominees of the original holder, Smt. Gangubai. The prayer, therefore, is for honouring the agreement (Annexure P-7) and for a direction to the J. D. A. to execute lease deeds in favour of the members of the petitioner-society of plots in consideration of the land development work done by the petitioner. ( 2 ) RETURN has been filed. At the time of hearing, learned Counsel for the J. D. A. reiterated that pending the proceedings against the holder, Smt. Gangubai, under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, the J. D. A. is unable to execute the lease deeds as desired and in pursuance of the agreement (Annexure P-7 ). The only question, therefore, for our decision is whether implementation of the scheme No. 15, finally notified by the J. D. A. in exercise of powers under the M. P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 1973 Act'), can be kept in abeyance because of the proceedings pending against the holder of the land, namely, Smt. Gangubai, under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act. ( 3 ) CHAPTER III of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, provides for the ceiling limits. Section 6 requires the person holding vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit to file a statement before the prescribed authority. A draft statement is then required to be prepared, showing the vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit. It is to be followed by a final statement. Vacant land even in excess of the ceiling limit is then to be acquired in accordance with Sec. 10 of the Ceiling Act of 1976. After such acquisition, the land shall be deemed to have vested absolutely in the State Government free from all encumbrances with effect from the date so specified. Compensation for vacant land so acquired has to be paid to the holder. ( 4 ) SECTION 19 of the Act then provides that the Act, shall not apply to certain kinds of vacant lands. According to sub-section (1) of S. 19 of the Act, it shall not apply to any vacant land held by : (i) the Central Government or any State Government or any local authority or any corporation established by or under a Central or Provincial or State Act or any Government company as defined in Sec. 617 of the Companies Act, 1956; (ii) any military, naval or air force institution; and (iii) any bank. Sub-section (2) of S. 19 is as follows :-"the provisions of sub-section (1) shall not be construed as granting any exemption in favour of any person, specified in sub-section (1), who possesses any vacant land which is owned by such authority, institution or organisation or who owns any vacant land which is in the possession of such authority, institution or organisation. Provided that where any vacant land which is in the possession of such authority, institution or organisation, but owned by any other person, is declard as excess vacant land under this Chapter, such authority, institution or organisation shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any of the foregoing provisions of this Chapter continue to possess such land under the State Government on the same terms and conditions subject to which it possessed such land immediately before such declaration. Explanation.-- For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression "to possess vacant" means to possess such land either as tenant or as mortgage or under a hirepurchase agreement or under an irrevocable power of attorney or partly in the said capacities and partly in any other of the said capacity or capacities. " ( 5 ) HAVING examined the scheme of the Ceiling Act and comparing it with the scheme of the M. P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, under which the agreements in question were executed between the parties, we are of the view that the respondent Jabalpur Development Authority is not justified in refusing to honour the agreements entered into with the petitioner on the ground that the final orders in the ceiling cases are awaited. The provisions of Sec. 19 (1) read with the provisions contained in the second proviso to sub-section (2) of Sec. 19 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, are specially meant, amongst others, to safeguard the developmental activities undertaken by the local authorities, such as the Development Authority, under various State enactments. Undoubtedly, the land in question can be said to be a vacant land held by the Jabalpur Development Authority within the meaning of Sec. 19 (1) (i) of the Act. It cannot also be doubted that the J. D. A. is an authority and Corporation established under a State Act within the meaning of S. 19 (1) (i) of the Act. Clearly, therefore, the provisions of Chapter II of the Ceiling Act are not applicable to the vacant lands held by a Development Authority under the Adhiniyam. The expression 'held' used in sub-section (1) of S. 19 has to be construed in the light of the scheme of the Act, meaning vacant land over which the specified statutory authorities or Government have effective control. The expression 'hold' is of wider connotation than the expressions 'owning' or 'possessing'. The second proviso to sub-section (2) of S. 19 quoted above is also a provision, which, according to us, would remove hurdle, if any, in the provisions of the Ceiling Act in the development work undertaken by the Authority under the provisions of the Adhiniyam. The expression 'hold' is of wider connotation than the expressions 'owning' or 'possessing'. The second proviso to sub-section (2) of S. 19 quoted above is also a provision, which, according to us, would remove hurdle, if any, in the provisions of the Ceiling Act in the development work undertaken by the Authority under the provisions of the Adhiniyam. Thus, if the authority, institution or organisation, as mentioned in sub-section (1) of S. 19, is in possession of any vacant land, but if that land is owned by some other person and is declared as excess vacant land under the Act, the authority is entitled to continue to possess that land, least affected by the legal consequences flowing from the provisions of the Ceiling Act in respect of the vacant land in its control or possession. This continuance of possession shall then be under the State Government but subject, of course, to the same terms and conditions under which it possessed that land immediately before such declaration. ( 6 ) IN the instant case, what appears to us is that on acquisition of the land in question from the holder of Smt. Gangubai and on payment of compensation to her, the land has vested in the J. D. A. and is now in its possession. The holder of the land, i. e. , smt. Gangubai, has lost all her right, title and interest in the land. Even if, therefore, the vacant land thus possessed by the J. D. A. is declared as land held by the holder Smt. Gangubai in excess of the ceiling limits, it shall continue to be possessed by the J. D. A. as having been duly vested in it. In the event the vacant land held by Smt. Gangubai is found in excess of the ceiling limits, a question may arise as to her entitlement for compensation, under the provisions of the Ceiling Act or under the provisions of the M. P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, being acquired under the provisions of that Act. With that question, however, we are, at present, not concerned. In our opinion, the proviso to sub-section (2) of S. 19 permits the J. D. A. , which is undoubtedly a local authority, to continue to possess that land, even if the whole or a part of it is finally adjudicated to be in excess of the ceiling limits. With that question, however, we are, at present, not concerned. In our opinion, the proviso to sub-section (2) of S. 19 permits the J. D. A. , which is undoubtedly a local authority, to continue to possess that land, even if the whole or a part of it is finally adjudicated to be in excess of the ceiling limits. Since the land has vested in that authority under the Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, there does not appear to be any impediment in dealing with that land, is if held by the J. D. A. and in accordance with the Adhiniyam and the rules framed thereunder. There is, therefore, no justification on the part of the Jabalpur Development Authority (respondent No. 1) in withholding honouring of the agreement (Annexure P-7 ). ( 7 ) THE petition is allowed and a direction shall issue in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent No. 1, Jabalpur Development Authority directing the latter to honour the agreement (Annexure P-7) and to execute lease deeds as contemplated therein in respect of the plots in favour of the members of the petitioner-society and to the extent indicated therein. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed. .