RAJESH BALIA, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioners are three sons of Bhoma Ram whose ceiling proceedings have led to filing of this petition. In the first instance, the proceedings were initiated against Bhoma Ram under the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973, which were dropped on 21st June, 1975 on finding that he does not hold any surplus land. By the orders of the State of Rajasthan Under Section 15(1) of the Act of 1973, the ceiling case was reopened on 15.11,1982. On 1st August, 1986, the Addl. Collector found that the said Bhoma Ram had no surplus land in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 1973. However, since according to second proviso to Section 4(1), a person is entitled to hold land only upto the limit which he could held under Chapter III -B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 or under the Act of 1973, whichever is less, therefore, computation of the holdings of Bhoma Ram were also made under Chapter III -B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, accordingly to which the Addl. Collector found that the family of Bhoma Ram consists of himself and his three sons, who are petitioners in this case, and the lands which were standing in the names of Sohanlal and Rajaram were also liable to be included in the holdings of Bhoma Ram. It has been found by the Addl. Collector that under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act Bhoma Ram could hold 92 Bighas 16 Biswas of land and on that basis he was holding 18 Bighas and 7 Biswas of surplus land. He also found that total holdings standing in the name of Rajaram, both irrigated and unirrigated lands taken together on conversion are equivalent to 21 Bighas of irrigated land and Sohanlal held combined lands equivalent to 16 bighas 5 biswas irrigated land. It is not in dispute that if these lands were not to be included in the total holdings of Bhoma. Ram. The said Bhoma Ram did not hold excess land under Chapter III -B also.
(3.) THE order of the Addl. Collector dated 1.9.1986 was challenged before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue by its order dated 24.8.1990 dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners. The review against the said order was also dismissed by the Board on 30.10.1990.;