ANANDRAO NAMDEO JACHAK Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is challenging in this petition an order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Poona Division, Poona, reversing the decision of the Deputy Collector that the petitioner did not hold any surplus land.

(2.) The Sub-Divisional Officer who made an enquiry into the holding of the petitioner came to the conclusion that the holding of the petitioner in terms of dry crop land came to 71 acres and 5 gunthas, while he was entitled to hold 96 acres of dry crop land. He, therefore, passed an order that the petitioner does not hold any land in excess of the ceiling area fixed by the First schedule to the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Ceiling Act). While computing the total holding of the petitioner, the Sub-Divisional Officer excluded certain lands which stood in the name of respondents Nos. 3 and 4 who are niece and nephew respectively of the petitioner. Respondents No. 4 is the daughter of the petitioners brother Sahebrao and respondent No. 3 is the son of Sahebrao.

(3.) Even though the Sub-Divisional Officer had held that the petitioner did not have any surplus land under the provisions of the Ceiling Act, he filed an appeal before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. The Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal while dealing with the appeal observed at the very outset that there was no declaration of excess area with the petitioner which would give him a ground to file the appeal.