Munishwar Nath Bhandari, J. - (1.) ALL these appeals have been preferred to challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 18th September, 1997, whereby writ petitions filed by the petitioners were dismissed. The brief facts relevant to the present appeals are that a land measuring 512 Bighas in village Allawas was belonging to two brothers, namely, Chandi Dan and Suraj Dan, in their joint Khatedari. Chandi Dan had three sons, whereas Suraj Dan had no issue. Suraj Dan sold 400 Bighas of land to Amba Dan in the year, 1969, out of 512 Bighas of the total land of joint Khatedari. The share of Suraj Dan in the land was then challenged by Chandi Dan and his three sons, which was then finally decided by the Board of Revenue vide its judgment dated 8.9.1991. This was based on a compromise entered between Chandi Dan and his sons with that Suraj Dan and Amba Dan. Pursuant to the settlement, land came in the share of Chandi Dan and his sons also. After settlement and the compromise decrees passed by the Board of Revenue on 8.9.1971, Chandi Dan sold the land of his share, including that of his son vide the sale -deed dated 14.1.1974. Subsequently, land was also gifted and further sold by said Shri Chandi Dan and this is how all the appellants came in Khatedari Rights and even mutation entries were also opened in the name of the appellants subsequently. This is one part of the facts relevant to the case.
(2.) THE second part relevant to the case is that pursuant to the sale of 400 Bighas of land by Suraj Dan to Amba Dan in the year, 1969, mutation entry was opened in the name of Amba Dan. Due to holding land of 400 Bighas by said Amba Dan, ceiling proceedings were initiated by the Government under the provisions of Rajasthan Tenancy Act of 1955. However, the same were dropped by the authorized officer vide his order dated 28.1.1976. The matter did not come to an end here, because pursuant to the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1973'), ceiling proceedings were re -opened vide order dated 18th/26th April, 1980 and, thereupon, vide the order dated 20th April, 1989, Additional Collector passed an order for cancellation of Khatedari rights for 377.18 Bighas of land of Amba Dan. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Additional Collector, Amba Dan filed appeal before the Board of Revenue. The appeal so preferred by the appellant was then decided vide the judgment dated 5.5.1992. This is an important event for his case because dispute as has been raised herein arose as Amba Dan had surrendered land of the petitioner -appellants in the ceiling proceedings finally decided on 5.5.1992. The appellants could know about the order dated 5.5.1992 when they were sought to be evicted by the Government. The appellants, thereafter, moved review petition before the Board of Revenue, but the same was dismissed, being not maintainable in view of Section 86 of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, because appellants were not the parties in the suit as well as appeal. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal of the review petition, the appellants preferred writ petitions to challenge the order dated 22.6.1992 passed by the Board of Revenue on their review petition, and also, the order dated 5.5.1992 wherein land was surrendered by Amba Dan which otherwise is belonging to the appellants. The appellants, in the writ petitions, also challenged the order of re -opening of the ceiling proceedings, as well as the order passed by the Additional Collector dated 20th September, 1989. The writ petition was precisely filed, on the ground that the Board of Revenue passed an adverse order to the appellants on 5.5.1992 by accepting surrender of land belonging to the appellants, without providing an opportunity of hearing to them. More so, when in the ceiling proceedings, Amba Dan was required to first surrender the un -encumbered land belonging to him. The land belonging to the appellants was thus surrendered in violation of the provisions of Section 18 of the Act, 1973. Both the issues were raised on the ground that the appellants, being transferees of the land in dispute, thus, required to be heard before conclusion of the ceiling proceedings finally. More so, when land belonging to them was illegally being surrendered by Amba Danm and even the surrender was accepted by the Board of Revenue, though before passing of the order dated 5.5.1992 the land in dispute was already mutated in favour of the appellants.
(3.) THE writ petition of the appellants was dismissed by the learned Single Judge, on the ground that a transferee has no right to intervene in the ceiling proceedings as held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kesa v. State of Rajasthan, 1987 RLW 1, apart from the fact that petitioner is not even a transferee of land from Amba Dan against whom ceiling proceedings were initiated. The land in dispute was transferred to the appellant by Chandi Dan. Thus, appellants, being not the transferee of the land from Amba Dan, they cannot claim a right of hearing. It was further seen that even the issue pertaining to surrender of land by Amba Dan in violation of Sections 16 and 18 of the Act of 1973 is not available to the appellants as land was not encumbered due to sale or gift by Amba Dan against whom ceiling proceedings were initiated. So far as dismissal of review petition preferred by the appellants by the Revenue Board, the learned Single Judge held that the appellants had no right to file a review petition, in view of the provisions of Section 86 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act.;