RANI BAHU Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER in the instant writ petition assails the orders Annexure -D & Annexure-F passed by Board of Revenue in the case arising out of the M.P. Ceiling on Agriculture Holdings Act, 1960.

(2.) SDO , Rehli district Sagar as per order (Annexure-A) passed on 19.2.1979 declared the certain land as surplus and modified the final statement prepared u/s 11 (6) of the Act. Against this order an appeal was filed before the Additional Collector, Sagar, appeal has been dismissed as per order Annexure- P dated 21.12.1981. Thereafter, revision was preferred before the Additional Commissioner, Sagar Division, Sagar. In revision the Additional Commissioner, opined that there is no provision for making a review under the Ceiling Act as the revision has been preferred by the aggrieved person, thus, the order passed by the SDO and Collector were set aside. The matter was taken in revision to Board of Revenue by Shri Ram Dayal and Sitaram, respondents No. 6 and 7. Revision has been allowed by the Board of Revenue and order passed by the SDO and Collector has been restored. This order was passed by Board of Revenue on 3.5.1988. Matter was heard on 2.5.1988 at Gwalior. An application was filed to recall the order as the matter was fixed for camp at Sagar on 9.5.1988 and counsel for the petitioner Shri Kamal Sodhiya appeared and noted down the date as 9.5.1988 for hearing at Sagar. It appears that subsequently the date was changed to 2.5.1988 by the Board of Revenue and at the same time Board of Revenue ordered issue of notice to the parties with respect to change of date of hearing. Application filed by the petitioner for setting aside the exparte order has been disallowed as per order Annexure-F dated 30.11.1988 passed by the Board of Revenue on the ground that intimation of change of date was given to Shri S.C. Sodhiya, Advocate. Petitioner submits that Shri Kamal Sodhiya had appeared on the earlier date when he had taken the date 9.5.1988 for hearing at Sagar camp as the parties belong to Sagar, case was fixed for hearing at Sagar and was to be heard on 9.5.1988. Intimation was not given to the parties as ordered by the Board of Revenue.

(3.) FOR the aforesaid reasons the order passed by the Board of Revenue Annexure-F and order Annexure-D are set aside. Matter is remitted back to the Board of Revenue to hear the parties afresh after issuing notice. As the respondents, who are the petitioners before the Board of Revenue, have not appeared before this Court in spite of service of notice, the Board of Revenue has to issue, notice of the date of hearing to them also. Revision be decided by the Board of Revenue afresh after hearing the parties in accordance with law within six months from today. Costs on parties. Security amount, if deposited, be refunded to the petitioner.