CHHITAR LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -

(2.) THE petitioners Chhitar Lal and Ratan Lal, sons of Govind Lal are aggrieved against the orders passed by Addl. Collector, Baran dated 31.3.1981 (Annex. 2) and order dated 26.6.1982 (Annex. 3) and finally the order of the Board of Revenue dated 11.9.1985 (Annex. 7).

(3.) VIDE Annexure 2 the Additional Collector after deciding the case under Section 15(2) of 1973 Act had come to a definite finding after going through the revenue record i.e. Khasra Girdawari etc. that the petitioners were jointly holding on 25.2.1958, the land 185 bighas 7 biswas equal to 100.53 standard acres as per Jamabandi for the year Samvat year 2014 to 2023 and from Khasra Girdawari it is also revealed that the land is irrigated. It was further found that certain land is to be excluded for being included under road area etc. and ultimately it was found that the petitioners were in possession of 97.98 standard acres and each of the pe- titioner was in possession of 48.99 standard acres. It was further found that none of the petitioner had more than 5 members of family. It was further found that after applying the formula of 79% intensity with regard to 48.49 standard acres in the hand of each of the petitioner. The stand. acres as per conversion in law comes to 38.70 standard acres and after deducting 30 standard acres as permissible ceiling area 8.70 standard acres were declared to be surplus. On the application filed by the petitioners for reviewing the order on the grounds mentioned therein, the order dated 24.6.1987 was passed. The Board of Revenue ultimately vide order Annexure 7 passed on 11.9.1985 in relation to both the petitioners had come to the finding that each of the petitioner was likely to surrender 11.78 standard acres as per re-cal- culation made vide Annexure 3. As a matter of fact after recalculation surplus area stood increased. The contention of the petitioner that the surplus area could not have been declared by treating it as Chambal Command Area (as irrigated), has no merit. All the authorities below have considered the matter in this regard and concluded as a matter of fact about the intensity of the area in question.