BAIJNATH KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three writ applications, being inter connected, have been heard together Shambhu Prasad Singh and are being disposed of by a common judgment. C.W.J.C. No. 1134 of 1974 has been filed by one Mahanth Sunder Giri. The petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 1132 of 1974 and 1133 of 1974 claim to be settlees from Mahanth Sunder Giri. It appears that a case record under the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was opened on the 5th March, 1965 and a general notice under Sec. 6 of the Act was issued. By the said notice, big land -holders were required to file their returns within 90 days. Mahanth Sunder Giri, who, according to the respondents, owns about 700 bighas of land, did not file any return. The case of Mahanth Sunder Giri is that he was not aware of any such notice. Be that as it may, on the basis of certain information gathered, the Deputy Collector Incharge Land Reforms, Saharsa (hereinafter referred to as the 'D.C.L.R.'), on the 1st August, 1970 started case No 279 of 1970 -71 against Sunder Giri and ordered that a notice under Sec. 8 (1) of the Act should issue to him immediately calling upon him to submit return in Form No. L.C. (II) within 60 days of the service of the notice. On the 4th August 1970, the D.C.L.R. directed the Anchal Adhikari, Sonbarsa to submit a detailed information under Sec. 7 of the Act, after making an enquiry, with regard to the lands held by Sunder Giri, by the 10th August 1970. In this order he referred to the proceeding of 1965 in which general notice under Sec. 6 of the Act had been issued. On the 10th August, 1970 the D.C.L.R. after examining the information report of the Anchal Adhikari, Sonbarsa ordered for furnishing more details immediately so that categories of the lands of Sunder Giri might be known. On the 13th August, 1970, he examined the further report of the Anchal Adhikari and ordered for making a draft statement under Sec. 10 of the Act. From this order it appears that Sunder Giri was found to be holding 607 acres of land, out of which he was entitled to retain 30 acres only, besides 2 -95 acres of orchard and 5.87 acres of homestead lands. On the 14th August, 1970, the draft statement under Sec. 10 of the Act was prepared and published. The order -sheet dated the 18th August, 1970 shows that service return of the draft statement on Sunder Giri was received on that date. Learned Counsel for the petitioners pointed out that this order -sheet states incorrect facts as the service report throws doubt about the service of notice of the draft statement on Sunder Giri on or before the 18th August, 1970.

(2.) The case of petitioner Sunder Giri is that, when he came to learn of the issuance of the draft statement, he filed an appeal before the Commissioner against the order, dated the 14th August, 1970, according to which the draft statement was prepared and published. During the pendency of that appeal before the learned Commissioner, on the 17th December, 1970 Sunder Giri filed a return of the lands held by him. This was done under orders of the Commissioner. On the 23rd December, 1970, the Commissioner sent the return to the Collector, and, on the 3rd February, 1971, the Collector, in his turn, sent the return to the D.C.L.R. on the Ceiling Case No. 5 of 1971 was started by the D.C.L.R. on the basis of that return, and the Anchal Adhikari was directed to make a report. Without waiting for the disposal of that case, on the 17th May, 1971, the final publication under Sec. 11 of the Act was ordered. Thereafter, it appears that Sunder Giri filed an application before the Collector for staying distribution and settlement of the lands which were to be declared as surplus lands. Several objections were also filed before the Collector, by the petitioner of C.W.J. C. No. 1132 of 1974 and the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 1133 of 1974, in which they stated that the lands claimed by them were settled with them by Sunder Giri and they belonged to them and, therefore, they could not be declared as surplus lands of Sunder Giri. All these cases were transferred to Additional Collector for disposal. Vide order, dated the 17th March, 1972, the Additional Collector rejected applications, the main ground being that the claims and objections were not made under Sec. 15 (3) of the Act, nor appeals were filed under rule 44 (ii) of the Bihar Land Ceiling Rules. 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'). Against this order, three appeals were filed before the Commissioner -one by Sunder Giri, another by the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 132 of 1974 and the third by the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 1133 of 1974. The Commissioner dismissed the appeal of Sunder Giri summarily, holding that, after the publication of the notification under Sec. 15 (3) of the Act, in the official Gazette, there was no provision for any further appeal by the land -holder, though he observed that the Additional Collector was not correct in saying that the land -holder could also file an objection under Sec. 15 (3) of the Act, or that an appeal could be filed by him under rule 44 (11) of the rules. It is strange that he dismissed the other two appeals also by reference to this order, without applying his mind to the fact whether the observations made by him in the appeal of Sunder Giri could apply to those two appeals, specially in view of the fact that no notices were issued to the appellants of those two appeals in the proceeding and they were entitled to file objections under Sec. 15 (3) of the Act.

(3.) Three applications in revision by the petitioners of the three writ applications were filed before the Board of Revenue. The Additional Member Board of Revenue, who has disposed of the applications in revision, has held them to be not maintainable, mainly on the ground that the Board has no jurisdiction to entertain applications in revision after final publications under Sec. 11 of the Act. In these writ applications, the petitioners pray for cancelling and setting aside the resolution of the Additional Member, Board of Revenue and also the entire proceedings of case no. 279 of 1970, 1971, including the Gazette notification published on the 17th/19th May, 1971.