CHANDRA SHEKHAR BHATTACHARYA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed for appropriate writ/ order to quash the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, dated 30 -8 -1991 in Revenue Misc. Appeal No. 21 of 1991 -92 whereby and whereunder, the further proceeding in Settlement Case No. 26 of 1985 -86 was stayed.

(2.) It appears a ceiling case was initiated against Annapurna Devi and ultimately at the stage of final publication certain lands were declared surplus. Petitioners having learnt about the final publication and since no opportunity was given to them by the authority, filed C.W.J.C. No. 1316 of 1984, which was disposed of on 9 -3 -1984 directing the authorities to consider the objection of the petitioners filed under Section 10(2) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961, in short "Ceiling Act". The authorities were directed to decide whether petitioners were the real land -holders as claimed? Since by the time, the petitioners could file objection under Section 10(2) of the Ceiling Act, the ceiling case was finally disposed of, Appeal No. 26 of 1984 -85 was preferred before the Deputy Commissioner but the same was dismissed on 2 -4 -1985. Faced with such situation, petitioners filed another writ application bearing C.W.J.C. No. 2922 of 1986, which was disposed of on 31 -7 -1986, reiterating the previous decision with a direction to the authorities that the objection filed by the petitioners under Section 10(2) must be entertained and decided in their presence after hearing. The authorities were also required to decide whether the petitioners were the real land -holders or there are some other persons. It was further directed that so long objection of the petitioners is not dealt with on merit in accordance with law, lands in question shall not be distributed, if not already distributed.

(3.) It would appear that in view of the above direction, the matter was ultimately taken up by the Sub -Divisional Officer, Jamtara and after hearing the petitioners and other relevant parties including the previous settlees (respondents No. 4 to 23) the objection of the petitioners was allowed holding them the real land -holders. It was also held that since the land -holders were entitled for six units of 30 acres each, therefore, they would require 180 Acres as a whole. But the total area of the land involved in the ceiling case was only 69.16 Acres, therefore, there was no surplus land. Accordingly, he ordered for cancellation of Purcha and restoration of possession over such lands to the land -holders.