1. The petitioner, Gobardhan Goshala Rakhwari, has filed this application under Arts.226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing annexures 1, 3 and 4 to the writ application, Annexure-1 is the order of the Collector rejecting a petition made by the petitioner under S.10(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be called "the Act"). Annexure-3 is the order of the Board of Revenue dismissing the appeal against the order of the Collector. Annexure-4 is the Gazette notification under S.29(1)(b)(v) of the Act.

2. The petitioner is a registered Goshala under the Societies Registration Act as well as under the Bihar Goshala Act, 1950. The petitioner is in possession of lands for the maintenance of Goshala. A Ceiling Case No. 2 of 1976-78 was initiated in the name of the petitioner under the Act. The petitioner submitted a return to say that the institution possessed 284 bighas of land. A draft statement under Sec.10 of the Act was prepared which, however, shows that according to the Revenue authorities the petitioner Goshala was in of possession 307.07 acres of land. That every draft statement showed that the petitioner Goshala was allowed to retain 60.15 acres of land and the remaining portion measuring about 246.92 acres was declared excess. When the draft statement was served on the petitioner an objection under Sec.10(3) of the Act was filed giving the details of requirement of the Goshala and thereby objection to the declaration of the excess land. The Collector of Madhubani rejected the objection as will appear from Annexure-1 to the application. Being aggrieved by that order the petitioner preferred an appeal under S.30 of Act before the Board of Revenue which also Was dismissed (vide Annex. 8). Annex. 4. as has been said above is a Gazette Notification which only shows that only 60.15 acres of land detailed therein was exempted from the operation of the Act.

3. The Act has fixed ceiling area for a "family" and according to Section 8 of the Act it is not lawful for a family to hold land in excess of ceiling area except as provided under this Act. This general law, however, does not apply in cases where lands are held by Universities, hospitals, orphanages or similar institutions because they do not come under the definition of "family", given in Sec.2(ee) of the Act. The Act, therefore, has provided for exempting these institutions from the operation of the Act but only to the extent of the land which would be notified for the purposes of exemption. This is provided for under Sec.29(1)(b)(v) of the Act which would run as follows :-

"29-(1)(a). The provisions of this Act shall not apply to (i)...............

(b) The provisions of Sections 5 and 8 shall not apply to- (v) Such extent of land held on the date of commencement of this Act by such public or charitable bodies or religious institutions of public nature running educational institutions hospitals, maternity homes and orphanages, as may be notified by the State Government in this behalf, so long as they continue as such."

It is clear from this that the land which will be notified under the above provisions will be exempted from the operation of the Act. In other words the institution will be permitted to retain only that land for it and the balance would be taken away by the State Government as excess land. What area of land would be notified under the provision quoted above depends upon the requirement of a different institution, and for ascertaining that Rules 8 and 9 of the Rules under the Act have been framed which envisages regular inquiry in that regard. The manner of inquiry is also detailed in these rules. It has, therefore, to be seen if the inquiry contemplated by Rules 8 and 9 has been done in the instant case or not. The petitioners main grievance is that absolutely no such inquiry was made in accordance with the requirements of the rule and the petitioner was not afford