RAJESHWARI DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred by the landholder along with others against the order dated 6th October 1993, passed in Ceiling Appeal No. 277/92, as contained in Annexure -5. By the impugned appellate order, the appeal petition which was preferred by the Respondents State of Bihar has been allowed and the order dated 13th December, 1991 passed by Sub -divisional Officer, Sadar, Patna in Land Ceiling Case No. 130/73 -74 has been set aside. The revisional order dated 26th December, 1995 passed by the Addl. Member, Board of Revenue in Ceiling Revision Case No. 235/93 is also under challenge the authorities having affirmed the appellate order.

(2.) THE brief tact of the case are as follows : A land ceiling proceeding being L.C. Case No. 106/73 -74 started against the original landholder late Upandra Narain Choudhary. The petitioner No. 1 Most. Rajeshwari Devi is the wife of late Upendra Narain Chcudhary, the landholder Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, namely. Amlendra Narain Choudhary and Dr. Bimlendr Narain Choudhary are the two sons of landholder, late Upenora Narain Choudhary Petitioner No.4 Samir Kumar is the grandson, whereas Petitioner No.5 Smt. Asha Rani Devi and petitioner No. 6 Smt. Sheela Rani Devi are two married daughters of landholder, late Upendra Narain Choudhary. In the land ceiling proceeding draft statement under Section 10(2) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (for short the Act) was prepared, showing 439.13 acres of land of landholder, late Upendra Narain Choudhary. Said Upendra Narain Choudhuy then filed return, when statement under Section 10(2) of the Act was prepared on 31.5.1983/1.6.1983. In the said statement under Section 10(2) of the Act, 439.11 acres of lands were shown to be the lands held by the landholder out or which 123.25 acres of lands were shown to have been voluntarily surrendered by the landholder. The family or the landholder were shown to be entitled for three units i.e. 75 acres of Class -III lands and 240.89 acres of lands were shown to be surplus land. In feet in the meantime landholder -Upendra Narain Choudhary died on 7th May, 1978 and the heirs were substituted. Three units were granted to the family of the landholder i.e. on in favour of widow Most. Rajeshwari Devi, the second unit to the son Dr Bimlendra Narain Choudhary and the third unit to the second son Amlendra Narain Choudhary. No unit was however, granted in favour of grandson, Samir Kumar. The petitioners filed objection under Section 10(3) of the Act. In the said objection petition, they raised a number or questions on the basis of certain facts, including the following objections : (a) In the verification report of the Circle Officer dated 10th July, 1976, the petitioner Samir Kumar, grandson, was shown to be major (26 years) a. on 10th July, 1976, so one unit should have been allotted in his favour ; (b) Certain lands (73 acres) were gifted by two gifts dated 18th April 1963 in favour of two daughters namely, Smt. Asha Rani Devi and Smt. Sheela Rani Devi in terms with the then Section 5 (5) of the Act and thereby those lands should not have been included in the lands of the landholder nor could have been declared as surplus and (c) Certain lands, which were transferred to Smt. Asha Rani Devi (Respondent No. 6 herein), should have been excluded from the land of the landholder. On contest, the court of S.D.O. Sadar, Purnea passed order on 16th September, (Annexure -1/D). By the said order, four unit were allotted in favour of petitioners i.e. one unit for the widow, two units for the two son and one unit for the grandson. However certain other relief were not allowed in favour of the petitioners not publication under Section 11 (1) of the Act was, accordingly, issued on 13th October, 1988. The petitioners as well as Respondents State of Bihar both preferred appeal. The appeal preferred by the petitioners was numbered as Appeal No. 366/88 89 -82/77/89 -90, whereas the other appeal preferred by the Respondents State was numbered as Appeal No. 376/88 -89/18/89 -90. Both the aforesaid appeals were heard and disposed by common order dated 9th July, 1990 (Annexure - 3). The appellate authority remitted the matter for re -determination of two questions namely, (a) the claim of purchaser relating to transfer of lands and (b) claim of daughters relating to two gifts which were made in their favour. The rest of the orders passed by the S.D.O. Sadar Purnea were affirmed. The S.D.O. Sadar on such remand re -decided the aforesaid has issues by order dated 13th November, 1991 (Annexure 4). Both the aforesaid issues were decided in favour of the petitioners. The lands gifted to the two daughters were ordered to be deleted and the lands which were transferred in the name of Smt. Ashs Ram Devi (Respondent No. (6) were also ordered to be deleted. Against said order dated 13th November 1991, passed in Ceiling Case No. 106/73 -74, the Respondents State preferred appeal, being Ceiling Appeal No. 277/1992. After hearing the parties the Respondent Addl. Collector Land Ceiling Purnea allowed the appeal in favour of the Respondents State by impugned order dated 6th October, 1993 (Annexure 5). The appellant authority this time only allowed two unit in favour of the petition end namely, one in favour of widow Most. Rajeshwari Devi and the other in fovour of the second son Amlendra Narain Choudhary. The units which were earlier allowed in favour of the other sons Dr. Bimlendra Narain Choudhary and grandson, Samir Kumar, were disallowed by the appellate authority on the ground that they are foreign nationals. The lands which were gifted in favour of the two daughters, namely, Asha Rani Devi and Sheela Rani Devi and transferred to Respondent, Asha Rani Devi, were ordered to be treated as the Ind. of the landholder, late Upendra Narain Choudbary and were counted for declaration as surplus lands. The petitioner thereafter preferred revision application before the Board of Revenue, which was registered as Case No. 235/93. The learned Addl. Member, Board of Revenue by impugned Resolution dated 26th December. 1995 (Annexure 3), rejected the revision application.

(3.) TH . Counsel for the petitioners submitted that after the original order passed by S.D.O. Sadar dated 16th Sept. 83 when Ceiling Appeal Nos. 336/88 -89 and 376/88 -89 were preferred by the petitioners, the appellate authority by order dated 9th July 1990 (Annexure -3), affirmed the decision relating to grant of units. The appellate authority remitted the matter to decide only two issues relating to gifted lands and transferred lands. It is submitted that when the original authority decided only the aforesaid two issues relating to transferred lands and gifted lands, by order dated 13th November 1991, on appeal preferred by the Respondent State being Ceiling Appeal No. 227/92, the matter relating to units would no have been looked into and there was no justification to set aside the earlier order granting two units in favour of the first son Dr. Bimlendra Narain Choudhary and grandson Samir Kumar. It was further stated that in fact no challenge was made by the Respondents State against the earlier order of the appellate authority dated 9th July, 1990 (Annexure 3), so far the lame relates to grant of units in favour of the petitioners. It was also pointed out that vide Ceiling Appeal No. 277/92 preferred by the State, no challenge was made with respect to grant of four units but the challenge was made against the order dated 13th November, 1991, which relates to two issues i.e. transferred land and lifted lauds.