HARGOVIND PANNALALJI KASAT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal arises from the order dated 31-1-1995 passed in Writ Petition No. 252 of 1995 whereby the petition filed against the order of the Additional Commissioner in exercise of powers under section 45 (2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on holdings) Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as "the said Act" has been dismissed.

(2.) Few facts relevant for the decision are that in exercise of powers under section 21 of the said Act, the Surplus Land Determination Tribunal (SLDT) , murtizapur by its order dated 9-4-1987 had declared 12. 03 acres of land of the appellant being surplus with the family unit of the appellant. The appeal against the said order by the appellant was dismissed by the Maharashtra Revenue tribunal, Nagpur by its order dated 27-11-1987. In the said appeal, the respondent-State had filed cross-objections but as late as on 14-8-1987, though the respondents were served with the notice of the said appeal on 12-5-1987. In august, 1989, the SLDT took possession of the surplus area of 12. 03 acres of the land of the appellant's family in terms of its order dated 9-4-1987. Meanwhile, in february, 1989 the Additional Commissioner in exercise of powers under section 45 of the said Act issued notices to the appellant in relation to additional area of land. The appellant objected to the said exercise of power under section 45 by the additional Commissioner by filing his written statement on 10-10-1994. After hearing the parties, the Additional Commissioner by its order dated 23-11-1994 declared Survey No. 18, admeasuring 24 acres and 20 gunthas as surplus land with the family unit of the appellant. The same was sought to be challenged by way of writ petition which was dismissed by the impugned order.

(3.) The challenge to the impugned order and the proceedings under section 45 of the said Act is three-fold, firstly, that the concerned authority was not empowered to exercise the powers under section 45 of the said Act as the issue of the surplus land of the family unit of the appellant was concluded by the order under section 21 of the said Act dated 9-10-1987 and confirmed by the maharashtra Revenue Tribunal on 27-11-1987. Secondly, the respondents had neither filed any appeal within the prescribed period of limitation for filing an appeal nor the cross-objections were filed within one month from the date of receipt of the notice relating to the filing of the appeal by the appellant. Thirdly, the possession of the surplus land declared under section 21 had already been taken over by the competent authorities and, the proviso to section 45 (2) , as it stood at the relevant time, did not permit the exercise of powers under section 45 in those circumstances. In short, the exercise of power under section 45 (2) of the said Act is under challenge.