SHANKARGIR GULABGIR GOSAVI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these three petitions common questions of law are involved, all the petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THE petitioners, by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenged the order dated 24-7-1991 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (M. R. T.) in Ceiling appeal No. Alc. A.-3 of 1991 whereby the appeal was dismissed and the findings recorded by the Surplus Land Determination Tribunal (S. L. D. T.) by the order dated 7-1-1991 were confirmed by which the claim of the petitioners purchasers was negatived that they being the purchasers of the agricultural land from Ajay Madhukar Yerawar should be excluded from consideration while delimiting the surplus land as per the provisions of the Maharashtra agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (for short, the Ceiling Act ).

(3.) MADHUKAR Yerawar is the owner of agricultural land and Revenue Case no. 188/60-A (5)75-76 of village Ghatna was started against him by the revenue authorities. The land holder had filed return and previously the matter was remanded by the M. R. T. in Ceiling Appeal No. 15 of 1990 by the order dated 24-9-1990 in which the M. R. T. set aside the earlier delimitation order passed by the S. L. D. T. , Yeotmal on 21-8-1989. The M. R. T. remanded the matter for fresh delimitation of the land in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the Ceiling Act. In pursuance of the remand order, the S. L. D. T. initiated the proceedings and issued notices to all the interested persons. In all 20 persons were served as an interested persons as those 20 persons have purchased the agricultural land held by respondent no. 2 after 2-10-1975. The father of respondent No. 2 died sometime in the year 1991. In the meanwhile, Ceiling Appeal No. 15 of 1990 was preferred by the petitioners before the M. R. T. and the said appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the S. L. D. T. for computation of the delimitation of the land. The S. L. D. T. considered the contentions of the petitioners as well as the respondent Madhukar Yerawar and held that all the transfers made in favour of the petitioners by registered sale deeds were invalid. Being aggrieved by this order, the petitioners carried appeal to the M. R. T. and the appeal came to be dismissed on 24-7-1991 and this is how the petitioners are before this Court.