HAMIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing the order passed by the State Government under Section 15(2) of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the proceedings taken in pursuance thereto.

(2.) THE facts relevant for the disposal of this writ petition may be stated as follows. Under the provisions contained in Chapter III -B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. 1955 proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. The petitioner filed his declaration and submitted all the relevant details of his family members and the land before the S.D.O., Bali. After considering the relevant record, the S.D.O., Bali came to the conclusion that the petitioner was not holding any land in excess of the ceiling area applicable to him. He. therefore, passed an order on 20.5.1974 dropping the proceedings initiated against him. The copy of the order dated 20.5.1974 is Ex. 1. The State of Rajasthan or any of its officers did not. file any appeal or revision against the order dated 20.5.1974. Hence the order dated 20.5.1974 became final. After coming into force the above Act, the Authorised Officer (Ceiling)(S.D.O.), Bali registered a case against the petitioner being no. 133/79 and considered the matter. After going through the entire record the Authorised Officer came to the conclusion that the petitioner was not holding any land in excess of the ceiling limit. He, therefore, passed an order on 11.8.1982 dropping the proceedings. Again no appeal or revision was filed either by the State Government or any of its officers against the order passed by the S.D.O., Bali dated 1 1.8.1982. The orders of the S.D.O., therefore., became final. However, after a lapse of about 5 yeas, respondent no. 1 issued notice under the provisions contained in Section 15(2) of the Act to the petitioner and his family and an order was eventually passed. After passing the above order, respondent no. 3 Additional Collector, Pali, reopened the ceiling case of (he petitioner (no. 25/81) and the proceedings have been started against the petitioner. The proceedings are still continuing. The petitioner moved an application before the Additional Collector, Pali stating therein that the proceedings under the new law after coming into force of the new Act were taken and finalised. Hence the State Government could not have exercised the powers conferred by Sub -section (2) of Section 15 of the Act and no proceedings ought to have been taken by the A.D.M. The A.D.M. vide his order dated 16.9.1987 dismissed the above application.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has very vehemently contended that admittedly the proceedings under the old ceiling law were taken against the petitioner and dropped by the S.D.O vide his order dated 20.5.1974. However, after coming into fore of the new law by enforcing the above Act, proceedings again initiated against the petitioner under the new law. When such proceedings were pending, the State Government was not competent and legally entitled to have passed an order purporting to be in the exercise of Sub -section (2) of Section 15 of the Act.