BHAGYASHREERAJE SHIVAJIRAO DHANWATEY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) The appellants challenge the judgment dated 3-3-1994 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 1828/93. The only ground on which the impugned judgment is sought to be challenged is that the learned Single Judge as well as authorities below failed to take note of the fact of existence of natural tank in the land of the family unit of the appellants while ascertaining the total area available as the surplus land for the purpose of declaration under section 21 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 and considered the land occupied by natural tank as forming part of the land available at the disposal of the appellants.

(3.) Few facts relevant for the decision are that the appellants herein filed their return in terms of section 12 of the said Act on 5-12-1975. The S. L. D. T. , bhandara passed its order under section 21 on 5-4-1976 declaring 92. 91 acres of land as the surplus land. Being aggrieved, the appellants filed appeal before the maharashtra Revenue Tribunal and by order dated 23-12-1976 while, setting aside the order of S. L. D. T. the Tribunal remanded the matter for fresh consideration. The S. L. D. T. on fresh consideration of the matter passed its order under section 21 on 27-10-1978 declaring 87. 75 acres of land as the surplus land. Again being aggrieved by the said order, the matter was carried in appeal before m. R. T. and by its order dated 17-7-1981 again the order of S. L. D. T. was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration. The S. D. O. after hearing the parties by its order dated 27-7-1992 confirmed the order passed on 27-10-1978 by S. L. D. T. The matter was again carried in appeal before the m. R. T. and while setting aside the order passed by S. D. O. , the appellate authority by its order dated 23-4-1993 declared 34. 47 acres to be the surplus land with the family unit of the appellant. Same was challenged by way of Writ petition No. 1828/93 which came to be dismissed by the impugned order dated 3-3-1994. Hence, the present L. P. A.