Gopal through L.Rs. vs State of Rajasthan and Others

Mohammad Rafiq, J.—This writ petition was filed by Gopal S/o Shri Kishan, who died during its pendency and therefore his legal heirs were brought on record, who also died during its pendency and as such their legal representatives were also brought on record. In the writ petition challenge has been made to the order dated 13.08.1997 of Deputy Legal Remembrancer, Revenue (Group-7) Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, and order dated 20.05.1998 of the Deputy Secretary, Revenue (Group-O/Ceiling) Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, whereby the order dated 13.08.1997 was withdrawn and further ordered to continue the ceiling proceedings as was commenced prior to passing of order dated 13.08.1997. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that originally the ceiling proceedings against petitioner under old ceiling law were dropped by competent authority (Sub Divisional Officer, Kota) vide order dated 15.05.1975, who observed that revenue account holder Gopal has died and that he has three legal heir being his sons; it further found that they have 50.79 standard acre land and held that looking to the number of members in the family, the land possessed by them cannot be said to be in excess of the ceiling limit and as such it dropped the ceiling proceedings. The State Government, in view of the provisions of Sec. 15(2) of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973, found that the order dated 15.05.1975 is required to be reopened and accordingly, after issue of notice to person concerned, directed an officer subordinate to it, to reopen the said matter to decide it afresh and therefore the Deputy Secretary to the Government under the order of the Governor vide order dated 25.03.1982, exercising its powers under Sec. 15(2) of the Act of 1973, directed the case to be reopened and appointed the Additional Collector, Kota, as competent authority and directed him to reopen the ceiling proceedings and decide the same afresh. The Additional Collector (Ceiling), Kota, vide order dated 12.09.1983, held that it is not proved that the original khatedar died before 01.04.1966 and therefore as per Sec. 30-C of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act (Old ceiling law), since there were five members in the family, legal heirs of the khatedar could retain 30 standard acre of land and remaining land was held to be surplus. Total land found in their possession was 131 bigha 1 biswa i.e. 71.48 standard acre and after reducing 30 standard acre of land, 41.48 standard acre of land was held surplus, which was acquired. Since the matter was reopened by the, Government, the State Government, vide its order dated 07.05.1982 sent the matter to the Additional Collector (Ceiling, Kota) under Sec. 15(2) of the Act of 1973 for its decision afresh and the Additional Collector (Ceiling), Kota, vide order dated 29.05.1990, ordered that legal heirs of Gopal are entitled to retain 30 standard acre of land. Since they had total 50.80 standard acre of land, it declared 20.80 acre of land to be surplus, which was ordered to be acquired. Aggrieved thereby, petitioners preferred an Appeal before the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer, which, vide judgment dated 14.01.1994, dismissed the same. Thereafter, the Deputy Legal Remembers vide letter dated 13.08.1997 (Annexure-6) communicated the Additional District Collector (Ceiling) Kota, that it was decided that the ex-parte reopening order dated 07.05.1982/25.03.1982 and the action taken in pursuance thereof, is cancelled and the order dated 15.05.1975 of the Sub Division Officer, Kota, is maintained and the ceiling proceedings are dropped/ stopped. Thereafter, the Deputy Secretary'' vide letter dated 20.05.1998 (Annexure-7) communicated the Additional District Collector (Ceiling), Kota, about decision regarding withdrawal of the decision communicated vide letter dated 13.08.1997. It was further communicated that the letter dated 13.08.1997 may not be acted upon and it was ordered to continue ceiling proceedings as was commencing prior to communication dated 13.08.1997. Hence this writ petition.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

Contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that the government having once passed the order dated 13.08.1997 directing that the order of the competent authority dated 15.05.1975 should be kept intact and the ceiling proceedings in the case of the petitioners should not be reopened and it could not, without opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, withdraw this order subsequently by order dated 20.05.1998. It was argued that once by letter dated 13.08.1997 it was communicated that the decision of the government taken vide order dated 07.05.1982 whereby the matter was reopened and sent to Additional District Collector (Ceiling) Kota to decide afresh on directed points and the action taken in pursuance thereof, was quashed and the order of the competent authority dated 15.05.1975 was restored and ceiling proceedings against the petitioner was dropped, the government by itself could not have withdrawn this order dated 13.08.1997 by subsequent order dated 20.05.1998. Learned counsel in support of his arguments, relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Dadan Ram and Others Vs. State of Bihar and Others, , which was a case of reopening of ceiling proceedings and disposal afresh, wherein it has been held that the parcha-holders in possession of the land are entitled to reopening notice and hearing even though they had knowledge of order of status quo passed by District Collector. In absence of such notice and opportunity of hearing, proceedings are liable to be quashed.

Learned Government Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, opposed the writ petition. He argued that proceedings were started against khatedar Gopal under the Ceiling law and on 01.04.1966 the he was found in possession 50.80 standard acre of land whereas he could have retained 30 standard acre of land, therefore, remaining 20.80 standard acre of land was ordered to be acquired. The State Government took the said decision of the Competent Authority (Sub Divisional Officer, Kota), prejudicial and therefore under Sec. 15(2) of the Act of 1973, quashing the order of the Competent Authority, the matter was reopened and referred to the Additional Collector, Kota, by authorizing him to decide it afresh. At the time of deciding the ceiling matter, Gopal was found in possession 71.48 standard acre of land and he could have retained 30 standard acre of land and therefore 41.38 standard acre of land was declared surplus. This order was challenged before the Revenue Board and the Revenue Board, vide its order dated 27.06.1988, dismissed the same and upheld the order of the Additional Collector on all other aspects and remanded the matter to the Additional Collector solely for the purpose of re-determining the actual area in terms of the standard acres keeping in view the fact that the land of the petitioner was falling within the command area. In case the petitioners were aggrieved of that order of the Board of Revenue, then they should have taken appropriate remedy under law and therefore the order dated 27.06.1988 has attained finality and the order of the Additional District Collector (Ceiling) passed in pursuance of the order of the Board of Revenue, is based on facts.

Earlier the Additional Collector vide order dated 12.09.1983 held that it is not proved that the original revenue-account-holder died before 01.04.1966 and therefore as per Sec. 30-C of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act (Old ceiling law), since there are five members in the family, the legal heirs of the khatedar could retain 30 standard acre of land and remaining land is surplus. Total land found in their possession was 131 bigha 1 biswa i.e. 71.48 standard acre and after reducing of 30 standard acre of land, the surplus land was 41.48 standard acre, which was held liable to be acquired. However subsequent to remand, the Additional District Collector, vide order dated 29.05.1990, held that because the computation of the land was in standard acre would be only 50.80 and therefore the petitioner could have held only 30 standard acre of land and remaining 20.80 standard acre of land was declared surplus which was liable to be resumed/acquired. This order was further subjected to challenge before the Board of Revenue, which, by order dated 14.01.1994, held that since earlier judgment of Board of Revenue dated 27.06.1988 has attained finality because petitioner has not challenged that earlier judgment of the Board before the High Court, scope of appeal filed for second time by petitioners before the Board of Revenue would be limited only to examine whether the Additional Collector in his subsequent order dated 29.05.1990 has correctly computed the standard acres of 131.1 biswa of land. It is therefore prayed that the writ petition be dismissed.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

Curiously, petitioners did not challenge earlier order dated 27.06.1988 of the Board before this Court or before any other forum. They have also not challenged in this present writ petition subsequent order of the Board of Revenue dated 14.01.1994, thus both these orders have attained finality. The Government has no legal authority to set aside those two orders of the Board of Revenue, which have attained finality. The Board of Revenue in subsequent order dated 14.01.1994 held that the earlier order dated 27.06.1988 of the Board of Revenue has attained finality because the appeal of the predecessor-in-title of the petitioners was allowed on limited ground of correct computation of the standard acres of their 131.1 biswa of land keeping in view the fact that the land was falling in command area. The order of the Additional Collector passed in 12.09.1983 was upheld on all other aspects. Contention of learned Government Counsel is therefore liable to be accepted.

As regards non-providing of opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, suffice it to say that the order dated 13.08.1997 has been passed by the Deputy Legal Remembrancer, who had no legal authority to pass such order because he possibly cannot, by his order, set said the order of the Additional Collector dated 12.09.1983 particularly when that order emerged in the order of the Board of revenue and order dated 27.06.1988, which upheld the order on merits and remanded the matter again to the Additional Collector only on the question of correct computation of the standard acres and the Additional Collector again by order dated 29.05.1990 having made correct computation of the land in standard acres and the subsequent order also having been upheld by the Board of Revenue, the subsequent order has rightly been passed by the Department of Revenue (Group VIII), Government of Rajasthan, in its ceiling section, and has been communicated by the Deputy Secretary to the Government. The order dated 13.08.1997 was void-ab-initio and non-est order and because when the petitioners had contested the matter at all stages and on different occasions twice before the competent authority, twice before the Additional Collector and twice before the Board of Revenue, they cannot be allowed to say that principles of natural justice were not followed or they were not provided opportunity of hearing. Cited judgments have no application to the facts of the present case. Writ petition, being devoid of merit, is therefore dismissed. Consequent upon dismissal of main petition, stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and same is also dismissed.