SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Patna High Court dismissing the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the appellants.

(2.) The factual controversy lies in a very narrow compass.

(3.) L.R.D.C. by order dated 14.5.1984 accepted part of the objection and ordered for exclusion of the land gifted during grace period in favour of two daughters, namely, Nirmala Kumari and Sashibala. However, rest of the objections including the objection relating to classification of land was rejected. A Ceiling Appeal was preferred and the appellate authority by order dated 10.9.1985 accepted part of the objection. Certain lands which were earlier classified as Class- I land were held not properly to have been done. However, the other part of the classification was held to be valid. The gift made in favour of the two daughters was confirmed but the claim relating to deletion of land gifted in favour of daughter- in-law, Kamla Devi and grand daughter Bageshwari Devi was rejected. Thereafter revision case No.387/85 was preferred. The revisional authority by revisional order dated 28.4.1987, rejected the same. A writ petition was filed before the High Court and the primary stand was relating to classification made to declare certain lands as surplus. Similarly, non- exclusion of the gifts in favour of Kamla Devi and Bageshwari Devi were questioned. The State"s stand was that the amended definition of "landholder" as amended in 1973 was applicable. It was pointed out that the land ceiling proceedings were not initiated against any "individual" but against the family. In view of the definition of the expression "family", Kamla Devi, Bagehswari Devi and Chittaranjan Prasad Singh come within the definition of "family" and their land stood included. So far as the classification is concerned, it was submitted that after due verification and with reference to irrigational facility available the classification was made.