JUDGMENT This is a petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. Facts lie in a narrow compass. The land bearing Survey No. 4/1, situated in Village Piplia Kumhar, Tehsildar Indore was originally owned by one Babulal s/o Shaligram from whom the petitioner purchased it through registered sale-deed dated 23.2.1981 (Annexure-'P/1'). The respondent issued notice to the original owner Babulal on 31.5.1986 under the provisions of Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act') (Annexure-'P/2'). The said Babulal, in the case No. 442/A/90/C/1/77-78, filed objections. The respondent passed an interim order on 16.9.1981 (Annexure-'P/4') behind the back of the objector and elected to pass final order after affording opportunity of hearing to the objector. On 29.7.1982 it appears that the objector remained absent. The respondent, therefore, dismissed the objections (Annexure-'P/4'). The appropriate authority issued the notification under section 10 (3) of the aforesaid Act (Annexure-'P/5') informing the vesting of the aforesaid land in the State Government. Aggrieved by Annexures-'P/4' and 'P/5', the petitioner has filed this writ petition. I have heard both the sides. It is not disputed before me that the land in question was purchased by the petitioner on 23.2.1981 and no notice was ever issued to the petitioner. Section 9 of the aforesaid Act provides as under :- "Section 9. - Final statement. -- After the disposal of the objections, if any, received under sub-section (4) of section 8, the Competent Authority shall make the necessary alterations in the draft statement in accordance with the orders passed on the objections aforesaid and shall determine the vacant land held by the person concerned in excess of the ceiling limit and cause a copy of the draft statement as so altered to be served in the manner referred to in sub-section (3) of section 8 on the person concerned and where such vacant land is held under a lease, or a mortgage, or a hire purchase agreement, or in irrevocable power of attorney, also on the owner of such vacant land." Apart from the aforesaid infirmity, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the action of the respondent was without jurisdiction in that the land in question was not liable to be treated as 'Urban Land' or 'Vacant Land' as per the provisions of sections 2 (0) and 2 (q) of the aforesaid Act. The respondent seems to have relied upon the inspection report of the Revenue Inspector (Annexure- 'R/1'). This report, however, is ex-parte and the petitioner is not granted any opportunity to meet this report and to press into service opposition as contended by him. Apart from the provisions of section 9, it is now the settled position that the authorities concerned are required to act justly and fairly. In AIR 1994 SC 2480 (Bhagwan Shukla v. Union of India and others), it is held that principles of natural justice are required to be followed. Article 300-A of the Constitution of India also contains that no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law. In Annexure-'P/4', the respondent stated as under :- mi;qZDr vk/kkjksa ij vkosnd dh vkifÙk;ka Lohdkj gksus ;ksX; Árhr ugha gksrhA vkt pwafd vkosnd mifLFr ugha] vr% mUgsa iqu% ,d ckj lquokbZ dk ekSdk nsdj vafre fu.kZ; ysus ds mÌs"; ls mUgsa uksfVl fn;k tk,A** There is no material on record to show as to what opportunity was given to the objector and how the objections were liable to be dismissed by one line order. In (1978) 2 SCR 272 (Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi), it is held as under :- "Independently of natural justice, judicial review extends to an examination of the order as to its being perverse, irrational, bereft of application of the mind or without any evidentiary backing." It is thus manifest that the proceedings are bereft of due application of mind and are also vitiated on the ground of absence of proper evidentiary backing. In the circumstances, I quash Annexures-'P/4' and 'P/5' to the extent of the land of the petitioner but grant liberty to the respondent as under :-- (a) The respondent shall consider on proper material whether land in question is the vacant land and whether any further proceeding is necessary. (b) On affirmative answer to the aforesaid question the respondent may issue proper notice to the petitioner with regard to the land in question under section 8 (3) of the aforesaid Act and decide the matter consistent with the principles of natural justice in conformity with law without unnecessary delay. This petition is thus allowed in part in terms indicated above but without any order as to costs. The security amount, if any, shall be refunded to the petitioner after due verification.