JUDGMENT:- This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad in Case No.1978/ICHlR-2483, dated 30.3.1993, whereby the Additional Commissioner exercised powers under Section 43 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 of suo moto revision and set aside the order of the Surplus Land Determination Tribunal, Gangapur passed in Ceiling Case No.75/CLNG/23 and remitted the case back for declaration that the holder was surplus for an area of 32 acres 14 gunthas instead of 27 acres 2 gunthas. Further direction was given to the Tribunal to de-limit additional area of 5 acres 12 gunthas for distribution after hearing the holder.

2. Facts giving rise to this case may briefly be stated as below.

Gowardhandas Laxmandas and Vishakhabai Gowardhandas were husband and wife. They filed 2 separate returns under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Ceiling Act"). After deduction the holding of land as per notices issued under Sections 17(1) and 17(2) of the Ceiling Act was found to be 166 acres 14 gunthas. Ultimately it was found that the total holding was 145 acres 17 gunthas. The land holder had one major son besides his wife and thus family consisted of 3 persons. In the circumstances, considering the Potkharab land ultimately it is held that 27 acres 2 gunthas land was surplus. The land holder gave the numbers of land which could be declared as surplus. Accordingly his choice was accepted and order was passed stating that 27 acres 2 gunthas as mentioned in the last part of the order was free from all encumbrances and those lands were declared as surplus. The order was declared on 8.11.1976. The said order is produced at Exh. 'A' with the petition.

3. At Exh.'B' there is order passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad. He stated that on preliminary scrutiny of the case record, it revealed that the Tribunal committed error: and so suo moto revision under Section 42(2) of the Ceiling Act is taken up. The memorandum to that effect was issued on 30.11.1978. The holder was served with notices and the grounds of Revision were communicated to him. As per the petitioner, the said notice was issued to him in the year 1992 after lapse of 16 years after decision of the Surplus Land Determination Tribunal, Gangapur (hereinafter referred to as, "the S.L.D.T.").

4. Learned advocate Shri. V. D. Salunke drew my attention to Section 45(2) of the Ceiling Act. Section 45(2) reads as follows:

"45. Control.

(1) ……………..

(2) The Slate Government may. suo malo or on an application made to it by the aggrieved person, at any time, call for the record of any inquiry or proceedings under sections, 17 to 21 (both inclusive) for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any inquiry or proceedings (or any part thereof) under those sections and may pass such order thereon as it deems fit, after giving the party a reasonable opportunity of being heard;

Provided that, nothing in this sub-section shall entitle the State Government to call for the record of any inquiry or proceedings of a declaration or part thereof under section 21 in relation to any land, unless an appeal against any such declaration or part thereof has not been filed within the period provided for it and a period of three years from the date of such declaration or part thereof has not elapsed;

[Provided further that, no order shall be passed under this section so as to affect any land which is already declared surplus and distributed according to the provisions of this Act;

Provided also that, the revisional jurisdiction under this section shall be exercised only where it is alleged that the land declared surplus is less than the actual land which could be declared surplus.]

(3) " The first proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 45 of the Ceiling Act has been interpreted in several cases.

5. Lea

Click Here to Read the rest of this document