Prakash Tatia, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the order of the Board of Revenue dt. 22.07.1995 (Annex.6) by which the learned Board of Revenue, Ajmer set aside the order of the Revenue Appellate Authority, Udaipur dt. 28.02.1995. Brief facts of the Bheru Singh are covered under the definition of the family given. case are that ceiling proceedings were initiated against one Bheru Singh (now deceased) under the provisions of Chapter IIIB of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1956, which is known as Old Ceiling Law. In the said proceedings, the SDO, Udaipur by order dt. 04.11.1971 declared 180.36 standard acres of agricultural land in excess in the hands of said Shri Bheru Singh. Shri Bheru Singh preferred appeal against the order dt. 04.11.1971 before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Udaipur which was partly allowed by order dt. 09.03.1972 and matter was remanded to the SDO with the direction to the SDO to give recognition to the transfers made to other persons other than the members of the family of the assessee Bheru Singh. The Revenue Appellate Authority further directed the SDO to inquire about the family members of Bheru Singh on specific issue whether the family members of Bheru Singh are family members of Bheru Singh as per the definition of 'family ' given in the provisions of the Old Ceiling Act. After remand, the SDO vide order dt. 02.12.1982 declared that Bheru Singh is entitled to hold 208 big has 17 biswas land equivalent to 111 acres of land which comes to 52.67 standard acres. The rest of the land measuring 92.09 standard acres required to be resumed under the provisions of the Old Ceiling Act. Before the SDO a specific point was raised that the land in question is ancestral land of all the sons, daughter and wife of Bheru Singh who are the coparceners and have share in the property by birth. It is also stated that they are not dependent upon Bheru Singh and therefore, they constituted separate unit and are cannot be treated to be family member of Bheru Singh for the purpose of assessing the land of Bheru Singh under Ceiling Law. It will be worthwhile to mention here that according to the petitioners even on 29.09.1971 an application was submitted before the SDO under Section 30B of the Old Ceiling Law stating therein that the property in question is ancestral property and the decedents of Bheru Singh are co -sharer in the property. According to petitioners that application was not considered initially when the learned SDO passed the order dt. 04.11.1971 but in view of the fact that appellate Court remanded the matter to the SDO by order dt. 09.03.1972 then the issue became open as in the remand order, the appellate Court directed SDO to examine the number of family members of the petitioners and to find out how many members of.
(3.) IT will be worthwhile to mention here that one of the son of Bheru Singh, Vikaram Singh submitted an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC before the SDO, Udaipur for becoming party on the ground that he is co sharer (coparcener in the property in dispute) and is not dependent upon Bheru Singh. His property may be excluded from the assessment of land in the hands of Bheru Singh. Said application of Vikaram Singh was dismissed by the SDO in its final order dt. 02.12.1982 on the ground that in ceiling proceedings complicated questions of law of succession cannot be decided and once the land is recorded in revenue record in the name of one person and that has not been challenged by his sons by claiming that they are cosharer then in ceiling proceedings they cannot submit that they are co -sharer in the property.;