- (1.) The State Government exercising the powers under Section 15(2) of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 (here-in-after referred to as the Act) had reopened the matter of the ceiling proceedings of the petitioners who are the heirs of Dev Karan of village s Sorkhand Khurd District Kota and after issuing notice to the parties, the Additional Collector Baran vide its order dated 31.1.1985 (Annexure-2) had found that the assessee was in possession of 47 standard acres of land on 1.4.1966 and there were six members of the family and after leaving 35 standard acres as permissible area, the remaining 12 standard acres of land to was declared to be surplus under the ceiling Act for the purpose of acquisition under the Act. The order dated 31.1.1985 was challenged before the Board of Revenue by way of an appeal and the Board of Revenue vide order dated 1.7.1987 (Annexure-3) dismissed the appeal.
(2.) It was the contention of the petitioner before the Board of Revenue that the land was ancestral coming from Mathura Lal, father of Dev Karan, the assessee and there was a deemed partition of the share of the petitioners in the property. A decree of partition was also relied upon. It was further mentioned that on 1.4.1966 Prem Narain and Madan Mohan were major sons. In Annexure-2 the order of the Additional Collector, it has been mentioned that in the return filed by said Dev Karan, the assessee, the age of Prem Narain has been mentioned to be 18 years whereas that of Madan Mohan has I been mentioned as 15 years as on 1.4.1966. Partition suit filed in the year 1965 was held to be ignorable in view of law of ceilings under the statute. It was further observed that no evidence was produced by the parties to show that the land in question was ancestral. It was further found that the transfer made in the name of minor was also not in accordance with law and transfer had been made only to defeat the purpose, aims and objects of the ceiling law.
(3.) Dev Karan was holding the land in village Sorkhand in his personal capacity and Sorkhand Khurd to the extent of 25.46 and 19.42 standard acres and in combination with others in village Sorkhand Kalan to the extent of 1.44 and 0.68 standard acres, the total being 47 standard acres. As per the report filed by the Khatedar Dev Karan, there were six members in the family. Preen Narain was of 18 years. It was stated that the land was partitioned in his favour in the year 1965, but for the reason that the property in question was not ancestral, there was no question of taking into consideration such a partition. Madan Mohan was found to be minor 'and after leaving 35 standard acres, the remaining 12 standard acres were declared as surplus. It is stated in the reply filed by the respondents that the aforesaid decree dated 18.12.1965 was obtained for the purpose of defeating the provisions of law. Further objection has been taken in the reply that the land was not found to be ancestral, the matter cannot be re- apprised in the writ jurisdiction. None of the petitioners had appeared before the authority when the notice was issued to reopen the case under section 15(2) of the New Act and, therefore, no objection can be taken by the petitioners in this regard at this stage.;