JANARDAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the writ petition, which has been dismissed by the judgment and order under appeal, it was contended that classification of a part of the land as Class -I land, while concluding the Land Ceiling Proceeding, was unjust and erroneous. The writ petition was dismissed only on the ground that this point was not raised when the draft statement was objected.

(2.) IT is true that in the objection it was not stated that the classification is erroneous, but the order of the first authority under the Act i.e. the D.C.L.R., clearly indicated that such a dispute was raised and in order to sort out the same, Anchal Adhikari was asked to once again verify the lands of the appellants for the purpose of ascertaining whether classification is appropriate or not. Anchal Adhikari on 30th October, 1983 submitted his report. In the report, Anchal Adhikari stated that the lands of the appellant are situate in Mouza Karanpur, Pahsara, Amuar, Dafarpur, Brindawan and Begampur and those were inspected in presence of the brother of the appellant on 4th October, 1983 and 5th October, 1983. He reported that in 1979 appellant made irrigation facility in respect of lands held by him in Mouza Karanpur and Amuar. He stated that on 9th September, 1970, i.e. on the appointed day, the lands of both the said mouzas were considered as Class - IV lands and parchas were also issued considering such lands as Class -IV land. Alongwith that, he forwarded his observations in respect of each piece of land held by the appellant and situate in different Mouzas referred to above. While doing so, he pointed out that the appellant is holding lands in Mouza Begampur, which has State Irrigation facility. He indicated that such lands, comprising of 12.22 acres, are Class -I land and the remaining lands held by the appellant in other Mouzas, comprising of 105.404, acres, are Class -IV land. Before the D.C.L.R., the appellant accepted and founded his claim on the basis of the said report of the Anchal Adhikari. The D.C.L.R. accepted the said report in toto. As a result, 12.22 acres of land was treated as Class -I land 105.404 acres of land was treated as Class -IV land.

(3.) FOR the reasons above, we find no scope of interference and accordingly this appeal is dismissed.