DAHYABHAI MALUBHAI NADODA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The neat question of law that arises under this petition under An. 227 of the Constitution of India is interpretation of application of secs. 6(3B) and 6(3C) of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act 1960 ( for short the Act) in the following facts and circumstances.

(2.) The deceased Dahyabhai Manubhai and his family members held agricultural land Sr.No. 72 admeasuring A- 44-14 Gs. at Vinzuwada village and land Sr.No.95 admeasuring A. 12-14 Gs. at village Varmor Ta: Viramgam Dist: Ahmedabad. Deceased Dahyabhai held in all A.56-28 Gs. of agricultural land. After necessary inquiry in Ceiling case No. 2193/76 the Mamlatdar and ALT by his order dated November 25 1981 declared that Dahyabhai Manubhai held land admeasuring A. 06-05 Gs. in excess to the ceiling limit. It appears that mean while Dahyabhai expired and his heirs including his widow Bai Gangaben Dahyabhai preferred appeal before the Dy. Collector being Ceiling Appeal No.67/81. The Deputy Collector by his order dated March 13 1981 quashed the order of the Mamlatdar and ALT passed on November 25 1981 and remanded the matter back to the Mamlatdar for giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and also an opportunity of selection under secs. 20 and 21 of the Act. The applicant Dahyabhai Manubhai had died on September 10 1978 On April 1 1976 he was alive and filed form No.2 in respect of the land held by him. The Mamlatdar and ALT (Ceiling) Viramgam by his impugned judgment and order dated November 25 1981 held that there were five family members in the family of Dahyabhai Malubhai and that he had no major son on April I 1976 and as such the applicant was not entitled to get benefit under sec.6(3B) and 6(3C) of the Act. The Mamlatdar thus concluded that the petitioners family was entitled to hold land admeasuring A 50-23 Gs. and that there was excess land of A.06-05 Gs.

(3.) The petitioners being aggrieved by the said judgment and order preferred appeal before the Dy.Collector (Appeals) at Ahmedabad who by his judgment and order dated February 19 1982 though there was no appeal on behalf of the respondent State held that the agricultural land admeasuring A. 10-05 Gs. owned and possessed by Raiyaben who was divorcee wife of Dahyabhai Malubhai should have been included in total area of land viz. A. 56-28 Gs. and thus the petitioners family had excess land to the extent of A 16-08 Gs. to the ceiling limit. It is not in dispute that Raiyaben was not a party either before the Mamlatdar 7 ALT and also before the appellate authority.