DALEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The proceedings were initiated under the provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceilings on Holdings) Amended Act, 1961. The original petitioner held lands in two divisions of the Maharashtra State, namely, at Aurangabad Division and Nagpur Division. Section 14(4) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceilings on Holdings) Amended Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Ceiling Act") lays down that where a person or family unit holds land in two or more districts of the same division, the enquiry shall be held by the Collector whom the Commissioner may, by order in writing, designate. In view of the facts of this case, it was necessary for the Collector, whom the Government would designate, to make an enquiry. Accordingly the State Government by an order or authorisation dated Jan 23, 1976, bearing No. ICH-1675/342053, signed by the Desk Officer, was issued. It is thereafter the Surplus Lands Determination Tribunal, Aurangabad, (hereinafter referred to as "the S. L. D. T.") held an enquiry and decided the case on April 19, 1977 and found that the petitioner was surplus holder to the extent of 81 acres 24 gunthas.

(2.) In appeal by the petitioner, the learned Member of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Aurangabad, (hereinafter referred to as "The Tribunal") found that the enquiry held by S. L. D. T. was irregular and remanded the case for holding an enquiry a fresh to the S. L. D. T. by judgment and order dated Sept. 26, 1978.

(3.) After remand, inter alia, a new point was raised that the Desk Officer appointed by the State Government had no authority in law to authenticate the order in the name of the Governor of Maharashtra under Article 166 of the Constitution of India. The S. L. D. T. ruled out the points raised by the petitioner and held on enquiry that the petitioner was surplus holder to the extent of 94 acres. The said order of the S. L. D. T. was further challenged before the Tribunal by way of an appeal. By judgment and order dated April 5, 1980. the learned Member of the Tribunal ruled out the contention raised by the petitioner as to the authentication of the order made by the Desk Officer and on merits remanded the matter again for fresh enquiry to the S. L. D. T.