BABAN PASWAN Vs. PRATIMA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) There was determination of the ceiling area in respect of the family of prabal Pratap Singh and Dinesh Prasad Singh and it was then worked out that 43.26 acres was excess land. The present Respondent 1 Pratima Devi being the sister of the aforesaid two persons raised some dispute stating that she was not heard in the matter. In the meanwhile the surplus land was distributed to different persons and the present appellants came into possession of some areas of that surplus land pursuant to the allotment made in their favour in 1985. Thereafter Prabal Pratap Singh and Dinesh Prasad singh filed a writ petition challenging the aforesaid determination of the excess land and also the distribution in favour of the appellants. Though the appellants were made parties in the said writ petition, the High Court ultimately dismissed their writ petition and the LPA filed by those two persons was withdrawn subsequently.

(3.) Thereafter the present 1st respondent Pratima Devi filed CWJC No. 323 of 1999 before the High Court contending that she was not heard and she was vitally interested in the matter before determining the ceiling area applicable to the family of Pratima Devi, Prabal Pratap Singh and Dinesh prasad Singh (who are Respondents 1, 7 and 8 respectively in this appeal). But unfortunately in that writ petition the present appellants were not made parties though it is a fact that on the date when the writ petition was filed the portion of the land was in the lawful possession of the appellants. That writ petition was allowed by the High Court by ordering certain areas claimed by the 1st respondent to be excluded from the ceiling limit of the aforesaid two persons (Prabal Pratap Singh and Dinesh Prasad Singh). When the appellants came to know about the said verdict of the High Court in the writ petition they filed LPA by obtaining permission. But the LPA was dismissed by a division Bench of the High Court with the following observations: