MAHANTH BRIJ NARAIN DAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order dated 30.1.2003 (Annexure 4), passed by the Minister for Revenue and Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, initiating proceeding under Section 45-B of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area & Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and has called upon the petitioner to present his case.

(2.) Land ceiling proceeding were started against the petitioner which had attained finality, whereby in substance three units had been allowed to the petitioner. Thereafter, the Collector of the district re-opened the proceeding under Section 45-B of the Act which was registered as Land Ceiling Case No. 5/73-74 (State of Bihar v. Mahanth Ram Charitra Das), whereby one more unit was allowed to the petitioner, over and above the three unites earlier granted. It was further stated in this order that 30 acres had been declared surplus which had been surrendered by the petitioner which vested in the State of Bihar. This order not having been challenged became final vide Annexure 1. Much after the proceeding under Section 45-B of the Act concluded, the Collector of the district decided to re-open the matter once against under Section 45-B and was registered as case No. 5/73- 74/59/92 (State of Bihar v. Mahanth Brijnarain Das). After affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the learned Collector of the District of Sheohar disposed of the same by his order dated 30.1.1995 (Annexure 4), whereby he has affirmed his earlier order 15.9.1983 (Annexure 1), and there was no alteration in the existing position. Section 45-B of the Act has been amended by Act VIII of 1997, whereby Collector of the district has been omitted and the State Government remains the only authority under Section 45-B empowered to re-open closed land ceiling proceedings under the Act. The Minister of the Department of Revenue and Land Reforms is now the prescribed authority, and has issued the impugned notice dated 31.1.2003 (Annexure 5) under Section 45-B of the Act whereby he has conveyed his decision to the petitioner to re-open the proceeding under the said provision and has called him upon to explain his position. Hence this writ petition.

(3.) While assailing the validity of the impugned order learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present proceeding is beyond the scope of Section 45-B of the Act. He relies on the following reported judgments :--