AKBARKHAN MAHMADKHAN MALEK Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the decision dated October 14 1982 rendered in Revision Application No TEN.B.A. 970 of 1981 by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal By the impugned decision the learned Member of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal confirmed the judgment dated 09-09- 1991 passed by the Assistant Collector Dhrangadhra being Civil Revision No 217 of 1981. The Assistant Collector Dhrangadhra in exercise of his jurisdiction under section 37 of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act 1960 (for short Land Ceiling Act) reversed the judgment of the Additional Mamlatdar & A.L.T Patadi in Land Ceiling Case No. 233 of 1976-77 dated 2542-1991 and there by the Assistant Collector Dhrangadhra held that Anjuman-e-Eslam Masjido of Dasada to held excess and surplus land to the extent of A.71 - 31 Gs.

(2.) The Mamlatdar and A.L.T. Patadi proceeded to prepare the list of persons holding surplus land as contemplated by Section 13 of the Land Ceiling Act wherein the name of the petitioner - trust was included as having holding surplus land. The Anjuman-e-Eslam Masjido is a public trust duly registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act 1950 Its registration number is B/55 Surendranagar. It appears that the said Trust has been managing several properties including the lands in question. The petitioner trust filled in necessary Form showing its holding of land on the appointed day as per the provision of Sec.10 of the Land Ceiling Act. The Mamlatdar & A.L.T having issued show-cause notice to the concerned party and having initiated inquiry in respect of holding of the land by the petitioner trust. The Mamlatdar & A.L.T. Patadi by his judgment dated 20-02-1981 held that the trust did not hold surplus land. The Mamlatdar and A.L.T. Patadi observed that the petitioner trust hold in all land admeasuring A-25 -31 Gs. Ceiling limit prescribed under section 5 of the Land Ceiling Act is 54 Acres for the area in which the lands in question were situated. The Mamlatdar and A.L.T. observed that the lands of Survey Nos. 261 269 271 and 145/2 admeasuring A.26-32 Gs. by A/K. No. 658 were transferred to Madresa and Islam Working Committee in contravention of Sec.8 of the Land Ceiling Act and therefore the said land was not required to be computed for the purpose of proper holding of the trust Section 8 of the Land Ceiling Act provides that transfers or petitions of Agricultural Land made or effected after 24th January 1971 or before the specified date i.e. 1st April 1976 by way or sale gift mortgage with possession exchange lease surrender or otherwise or partitioned any land held by any person should be deemed to have been transferred in anticipation in order to defeat the object of this Act unless it is proved to contrary. Therefore the view of the Mamlatdar was erroneous in excluding the land in question from the total holding and was contrary to the provision of Section 8 of the Land Ceiling Act. The Mamlatdar also held that the petitioner trust should be deemed to be a family within the meaning of Section 6 of the Land Ceiling Act and as such was entitled to three units. The reasoning adopted and conclusion arrived by the Mamlatdar were perse erroneous and inconsistent with the provisions of the Land Ceiling Act. The Deputy Collector Dhrangadhra in exercise of power under section 37 of the Land Ceiling Act suo motu called for record of the inquiry and the proceedings of the Mamlatdar in respect of the aforesaid Ceiling Case No. 232/76-77. The Deputy Collector Dhrangadhra issued notice dated 7th July 1981 to the petitioner trust to show cause why the aforesaid judgment of the Mamlatdar and A.L.T. should not be reversed. Thus the Manager or Administrator of the trust was given opportunity to appear and being heard. Several adjournments on behalf of the Public Trust were sought and the matter was adjourned on July 29 1981 20 & 7-8-81. The petitioner also sought adjournment on 27-8-81 which was refused by the Assistant Collector. The petitioner trust did not file any reply or objection to the notice issued under section 37 of the Land Ceiling Act. The Assistant Collector Dhrangadhra by his judgment and order dated 7-9-81 reversed the judgment of the Mamlatdar and held that the petitioner trust possessed surplus Land to the extent of 71 A-31 Gs. and directed the Mamlatdar to acquire the surplus land under section 21 of the Land Ceiling Act.

(3.) The petitioner trust being aggrieved by the aforesaid decision of the Assistant Collector Dhrangadhra preferred Revision Application No. TEN. B.A. 970 of 1981 before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal as observed above the learned Member of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal dismissed the Revision Application and confirmed the judgment of the Assistant Collector Dhrangadhra. It is against this judgment that the petitioner trust has approached High Court by way of present petition.