GANGADHAR RAGHOBAJI BHOYAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN an enquiry under the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961, while delivering its judgment dated 8-6-1997, the Member, Surplus Land Determination Tribunal, Samudrapur granted exemption of 4.00 acres of land out of land Survey Nos.55 and 86 situated in village Dhamangaon, on the footing that the land was unfit for cultivation due to cartway, footway and pits. This finding was given on the basis of report of the ex-talathi of the village, Shri Narayan Laxman Askar dated 4-6-1997. This report of Talathi had been obtained by the S.L.D.T. just prior to delivery of the judgment. From the original record I have perused this report of the ex-talathi. He has stated in the report that about 3 to 4 acres of land out of Survey No.86 was under footpath-cum-cartway and pits and that one acre of land out of land Survey No.55 was under the path and cartway.

(2.) THE Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in its appellate judgment dated 25-9-1989 relying upon the Crop Statement for the years 1967-68 to 1971-72 came to the conclusion that the Potkharab area in field Survey No.55 was only 0.20 decimals and in the field Survey No.86 only 0.60 decimals. He, therefore granted exemption in respect of only 0.80 decimals land instead of 4.00 acres. It is seen from the judgment of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal that the M.R.T. has completely ignored and not referred to the report of the ex-talathi, which was relied upon by the S.L.D.T. while granting 4.00 acres land. It also appears that the last crop statement relied upon by the M.R.T. is of the year 1972. The enquiry was being decided by the S.L.D.T. in the year 1997, placing reliance upon the crop statement which is 15 years old by ignoring current report was not proper. The M.R.T. did not consider the report of ex-talathi, which was current and hence erred in completely ignoring the same. In the circumstance, the Advocate for the petitioner states that this is the only point he is pressing.

(3.) SUBJECT to the aforesaid modification, all other findings of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal are confirmed and Rule is made absolute in the above terms. There shall be no orders as to costs.