GEETA DEVI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated, 19th December, 1975 passed by the Sub -Divisional Officer, Pali in Ceiling Case No. 334 of 1975 and the order dated 31st March, 1976, passed by the Addl. Collector, Pali in Ceiling Appeal, No. 46 of 1976: The facts related to the filing of the writ petition are briefly, as under:

(2.) THE petitioners are the daughters of the Rama Kishan and respondents Nos. 4 and 5 are the sons of the said Rama Kishan, whereas respondent No. 6 is the wife of Rama Kishan, Rama Kishan died on 18th September, 1959. At the time of his death 36 bighas and - 19 biswas of land in Khasra No. 85 was entered in the revenue records in the name of Rama Kishan and 550 bighas of land in Khasara Nos. 74,81, 86 87 add 89 were entered in the names of his sons. Pukhraj and Anandraj, respondents Nos. 4 and 5. The case of the petitioners is that all the aforesaid1 land belonged to Rarma Kishan and that 'Bapi Patta' in the said land had been issued in favour of Rama Kishan in Smt 2008 and on coming into force of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, Rama Kishan became a Khatedar tenant in respect of all these lands under Section 15 of the said Act. After the death of Rama' Kishan, proceedings were initiated for determination of the surplus and under the Rajasthan Imposition. of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act,1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) Notices under, Section 11, of the Act were issued on the persons in whose names the land was entered in the revenue records i. e. respondent No. 4 and 5 and draft statement under Section 12 was also served on those persons Neither any notice under Section 11, nor the draft statement under Section 12' were served on any of petitioners. Respondents No. 4 and 5 filed a reply to the notice and draft statement served on them and also filed affidavits wherein it was stated that the petitioners and respondents no 4 to 6 alongwith Ramakishan were members of joint family and after -the death of Rama Kishan in 1959. all of them had inherited the lands of Rama Kishan. The Sub -divisional Officer, Pali, by his order dated 19th December, 1975, determined that 316 bighas, 19 biswas of land out of 586 bighas, 19 biswas was surplus land on the view that 465 bighas and 8 biswas of land in Khasara Nos. 86 and 89 has been entered in the name of respondents No. 4 and 5 Pukhraj and Anandraj, sons of Rama Kishan on 18th Sept 1959, the date on which Rama Kishan had died and. therefore, Rama Kishan and his heirs could not claim any right in the said 465 bighas, and 8 Biswas of land. The S.DO. included 36 Bighas. 19 biswas of land which was entered in the name of Ramakishan at the time of his death also in the lands of respondents Nos. 4 and 5 and on that basis he determined the surplus area in possession of respondent Nos. 4 and 5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Sub -Divisional Officer, Pali, respondents nos,4 and 5 filed an appeal which was, disposed by the Addl. Collector, Pali, by his order dated 31 March, 1926. The Addl. Collector, partly allowed the said appeal and held that 181 bighas, 19 biswas of land was surplus area which was liable to be acquired. The Addl. Collector has proceeded on the basis that the lands belonged to the joint family of Rama Kishan and that inspite of the land being entered in the name of respondents Nos. 4 and 5,the sons of Rama Kishan, the rights of respondent No. 6 Smt. Surajkaur, the wife of Ramakishan, in the said lands were not extinguished and that the ceiling area has to be determined, after taking into consideration the share of respondent No. 6, also. The Addl. Collector held that in so far as the petitioners were concerned,, they were included in the unit of their mother Smt. Suraj 'Kaur and there was no basis for recognising their rights 'separately. Aggrieved by the aforesaid -order of the Addl. Collector, the petitioners have filed this writ petition.

(3.) THE writ petition has been (Contested by respondent No. 1 to 3 only. In the reply to the writ petition filed on their behalf it has been asserted that' as the petitioners Were not holding any land on 1st June, 1973, no notice was required to be given to them under Section 11 of the Act and the drat statement under Section 12, of the Act was also not required to be served on. the petitioners. It has been submitted that the, determination of ceiling area under the Act has to be made on the basis of entire is in the revenue' records and that according to the revenue records respondents Nos. 4 and 5 were independently holding 465 Bighas and 8 Biswas of land even during the life time of Ramakishan and that the possession of respondents Nos. 4 and 5 over 84 Bighas and l2 Biswas of land had been regularised by the Tehsildar, Pali on 17th April 1971 In the said reply it is stated that the decision of the Addl collector, Pali dated 31st March; 1976 is in contravention of the provisions of the Ceiling Law and that necessary action was being taken for reopening of the case under Section 15 (1) of the Act. The reply to the writ petition was filed on 8th November, 1977 but the learned Deputy Government Advocate has stated that no, action for reopening of the case under Section 15(1) of the Act has been taken as yet.