MAGANLAL HARJIVANDAS PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order passed by the Mamlatdar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal (Ceiling) at Bharuch ('the first authority' for convenience) on 24/08/1983 in Ceiling Case No. 7 of 1983 as affirmed in appeal by the order passed by the Assistant Collector at Bharuch on 27/02/1984 in Ceiling Appeal No. 2 of 1984 as further substantially affirmed in revision by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for convenience) by its decision rendered on 9/10/1985 in Revision Application No. TEN. B. A. 700 of 1984 is under challenge in this petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India. By his impugned order, the first authority declared the petitioner's holding to be in excess of the ceiling area by 43 acres 36 gunthas and in revision the Tribunal found the petitioner's holding to be in excess of tzhe ceiling area by 41 acres 23 guntbas.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this petition move in a narrow compass. The petitioner was found to be holding certain parcels of land in all admeasuring 100 acres 15 gunthas in village Alva, taluka Hansot, district Bharuch. The ceiling area fixed under the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 ('the Act' for brief) for that area is 42 acres. The necessary inquiry was thereupon undertaken by the first authority under Sec. 20 of the Act. It appears that the decision taken by the first authority, on conclusion of the inquiry, was challenged before the higher forum and the matter was remanded to the first authority for his fresh decision according to law. Thereupon it came to be registered as Ceiling Remand Case No. 7 of 1983. During the course of inquiry, it was found that the petitioner had one major son and he was holding certain parcels of land in all admeasuring 27 acres 21 gunthas situated in villages Alva and Uttaraj in taluka Hansot, district Bharuch. In that view of the matter, the first authority found the total holding of the petitioner to be to the tune of 127 acres 36 gunthas. Since the petitioner had one major son in the family, one more unit was given for the purposes of the ceiling area under the Act. As pointed out hereinabove, the ceiling area for one unit under the Act fixed for that area is 42 acres. The petitioner was found entitled to hold 84 acres of land in all together with one unit for his major son. The petitioner's holding was thus found to be in excess of the ceiling area by 43 acres 36 gunthas. The first authority by his order passed on 24/08/1983 in Ceiling Remand Case No. 7 of 1983 declared so and carved out some 43 acres 31 gunthas of land for declaration as surplus and vesting in the State Government free from all encumbrances. Its copy is at Annexure 'A' to this petition. The aggrieved petitioner carried the matter in appeal. His appeal came to be registered as Ceiling Appeal No. 2 of 1983. By his order passed on 27/02/1984 in the aforesaid appeal, the Assistant Collector at Bharuch dismissed it. Its copy is at Annexure 'B' to this petition. The petitioner thereupon invoked the revisional jurisdiction of the Tribunal by means of his Revision Application No. TEN. B. A. 700 of 1984. It may be mentioned at this stage that no revision was preferred by or on behalf of respondent No. 1 questioning the correctness of the appellate order at Annexure 'B' to this petition. By its decision rendered on 9/10/1985 in the aforesaid revisional application, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the petitioner was not entitled to have a separate unit for his major son as the latter was holding lands separately independently of the former. The Tribunal however accepted the peesent petitioner's case to the effect that his family consisted of more than 7 members including 2 minor sons and for each minor son the petitioner would be entitled to the 1/5th of the ceiling area to be added to his holding. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal declared the petitioner's holding to be in excess of the ceiling area by 41 acres 23 gunthas as against declaration by both the lower authorities to the tune of 43 acres 37 gunthas. A copy of the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal is at Annexure 'C' to this petition. The aggrieved petitioner has thereupon invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India by means of this petition for questioning the correctness of the order at Annexure 'A' to this petition as affirmed in appeal by the appellate order at Annexure 'B' to this petition as substantially affirmed in revision by the decision at Annexure 'C' to this petition.

(3.) There is substance in the submission urged before me by Shri Vyas for the petitioner to the effect that the Tribunal could not have upset in part the order at Annexure 'A' to this petition as affirmed in appeal by the appellate order at Annexure 'B' to this petition to the extent the petitioner was permitted to hold his lands to the extent of the two units of the ceiling area in absence of any challenge thereto by or on behalf of respondent No. 1 herein. According to Shri Vyas for the petitioner, the Tribunal is not empowered to exercise any sou motu revisional powers under Sec. 38 of the Act against any order of the Collector passed either under Sec. 36 or 37 thereof. Shri D. N. Patel for the respondents has, on the other hand, submitted that once the revisional jurisdiction of the Tribunal is invoked, the entire matters is at large before it and it would be open to the Tribunal to examine the correctness or legality of the order under challenge before it. In that view of the matter, runs the submission of Shri Paid for the respondents, the impugned decision at Annexure 'C' to this petition calls for no interference by this Court in this petition.