JUDGMENT Hon’ble Alok Singh, J (Oral) 1. Present petition is filed assailing the judgment dated 19.02.2015 passed by Additional Commissioner, Kumaon Division, Nainital whereby Ceiling Appeal was allowed and matter was remanded to the Prescribed Authority with direction to decide the question of surplus land, after issuing notice to 14 members of the Cooperative Society. 2. Undisputedly, earlier vide judgment and order dated 26.06.1976 Prescribed Authority, Ceiling, Kichcha, Rudrapur was pleased to declare 6.68 hectare land of each of the 14 shareholders of the Cooperative Society as surplus land; order dated 26.06.1976 was assailed in Ceiling Appeal No. 1149 of 1976 before the District Judge, Nainital; Ceiling Appeal No. 1149 of 1976 was heard and decided by the Second Additional District Judge vide judgment and order dated 17.06.1977; vide judgment and order dated 17.06.1977, Appellate Court was pleased to remand the case to the Prescribed Authority and has held that there were total 26 duly inducted members of the Cooperative Society and notices ought to have been issued to all the 26 members before declaring the land as surplus land. It was further held by the Appellate Authority that individual share of all the 26 members has to be considered while deciding the question of surplus land afresh. After remand order made by the Second Additional District Judge vide judgment and order dated 17.06.1977, matter was reconsidered by the Prescribed Authority and vide judgment and order dated 29.11.1982, Prescribed Authority was pleased to hold that land of 77 Bigha 12 Biswa 4 Biswansi was surplus in the hands of 26 members; judgment and order dated 29.11.1982 passed by the Prescribed Authority was assailed before the Commissioner, Kumaon Division, Nainital in appeal; this time, Appellate Court was pleased to remand the matter second time to the Prescribed Authority holding therein that initially society was formed with 14 members, therefore, while deciding the question of surplus land only share of 14 members ought to have been considered and share of 26 members was wrongly considered by the Prescribed Authority. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court. 3. I have heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. R.C. Arya, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent and have carefully perused the record. 4. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court. 3. I have heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. R.C. Arya, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent and have carefully perused the record. 4. Undisputedly, in the first round of appeal, first Appellate Court vide judgment and order dated 17.06.1977 was pleased to hold that there were 26 validly inducted members of the Cooperative Society, therefore, share of all the 26 members has to be taken into consideration while deciding the question of surplus land; judgment & order dated 17.06.1977 was never challenged before any higher forum in judicial hierarchy and was allowed to attain finality, therefore, in second round of appeal, there was no occasion for the Appellate Court to take u-turn from the observations made by the Appellate Court vide judgment and order dated 17.06.1977 and observe that share of only 14 members ought to have been considered instead of 26 members. In the second round of appeal, it is not open to the Appellate Court to set aside the findings of the coordinate Bench of the Appellate Court, who has decided first round of appeal, therefore, impugned judgment does not sustain in the eyes of law. Consequently, writ petition is allowed. Impugned judgment is hereby set aside. 5. It goes without saying that society as well as member of the society shall be at liberty to furnish their choice for taking surplus land out of their possession in accordance with law. 6. CLMA No. 2768 of 2015 also stands disposed of accordingly.