SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Pat) 20

PATNA HIGH COURT
U.P.Singh, J.
Kunti Sharma
Versus
State Of Bihar
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4560 of 1982 ;
Decided On : JANUARY 12, 1989

Sections 32-A and 32-B of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1962, required all pending proceedings to be disposed of afresh in accordance with the amended law.

Headnote:

BIHAR LAND REFORMS ACT - SECTION 10(2), 32-A, 32-B - AMENDMENT ACT 1982 - SURPLUS LAND - FRESH PROCEEDING - ABATEMENT OF EARLIER PROCEEDING - REDETERMINATION OF SURPLUS LAND - FRESH APPLICATION OF MIND REQUIRED.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners challenged the order passed by the Additional Collector under Section 10(2) of the Act, which held that the earlier proceeding stood abated and the petitioners' family was entitled to only one unit. The petitioners claimed that they were entitled to 8 units and the land was within the ceiling limits.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the impugned order was passed without a fresh application of mind and without considering the amended provisions of the Act. The court found that the Additional Collector merely referred to the old verification report and jumped at a conclusion that the petitioners' family was entitled to only one unit.

Issues: Whether the Additional Collector applied his mind afresh while passing the impugned order.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Full Bench decision of Harendra Prasad Singh V/s. State, which held that Sections 32-A and 32-B of the Act required all pending proceedings to be disposed of afresh in accordance with the amended law. The court held that the Additional Collector was required to consider the question of surplus land afresh in accordance with the amended provisions of the Act.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and remanded the matter back to the Collector for considering the whole matter afresh in accordance with law.

Judgment

U.P.Singh, J.

1. By this writ application, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the order passed by the Additional Collector contained in Annexure 5 dated 6-10-1982. The said order was passed by the Additional Collector under Section 10(2) of the Act. In other wards, a fresh proceeding under Sec.10(2) of the Act was started and by the said impugned order it was held that the earlier proceeding stood abater and the petitioners family was entitled to only one unit. By the in pugned order they were found to be holding 147.04 Acres of land as surplus whereas they were entitled to only 8 Acres of Class II land.

2. The petitioners family was a joint family possessing 165.04-1/2 Acres of Class II lands in several villages in. the district of East Champaran. In a proceeding under Sec.10(2) of the Bihar Act XII of 1962 the Additional Collector served a notice in Form L.C. 6 in the year 1975 allowing them three units in terms of Glass II lands declaring 111.04-1/2 Acres as Surolus lands An objection was filed and it was contended that there was no surplus land belonging to the family of the land holders and, therefore, the proceeding should he dropped. A report from the Anchal Adhikari was obtained and the objection was disposed of by the Additional Collector granting partial relief The first petitioner thereafter preferred an appeal, which was disposed of by the Collector in the year 1979 and the case was remanded back to the Additional Collector for fresh disposal in accordance with law. On remand of the case, the petitioner No. 1 then filed a written statement before the Additional Collector claiming 8 units and it was contended that since the land was within the ceiling limits, the proceeding was fit to be dropped. Considering every matter on record the respondent No. 2 the Additional Collector, Land Reforms (Ceiling) by his order passed in April, 1981 held that the land-holders were entitled to 6 units and the land belonging to the family of the land-holders were within the ceiling limit, and thus, the proceeding was concluded in their favour. Accordingly, on the finding that there was no surplus land, no proceeding under Sec.11 of the Act was necessary and the matter stood concluded on 18-4-1931 itself.

3. Meanwhile, the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Amendments Act, 1982 came into force and substantial amendments were made in the defining Sections 2 and 4. The computing Sec. 5 was all together substituted, and similarly Section 9, which gave an option to the family to select its ceiling area, was also substituted. In the material Section 10 Sub-clauses (C-1) (C-2) and (C-3) were inserted in Clause (C) of Sub-section (1) thereof. Changes were brought in the succeeding Sec.11 as well. Apart from material amendments in the other provisions. Sections 32-A and 32-B were inserted in the statute.

4. By virtue of amendments in Sections 2, 4, 10 and 11 and the actual substitution of Sections 5 and 9 (apart from amendments in other sections) wide ranging substantive and structural changes were brought about in the Ceiling Law. To give effect and content to these changes, it was, therefore, laid down in unmistakable terms by virtue of Sections 32-A and 32-B that the surplus area would be determined in accordance therewith, from the date of enforcement of the Amending Act. These two sections, therefore, were the effectuating or the executing provisions to give practical shape to the intent of the Legislature in making the statutory changes. It is with this end in view that Sec.32-A provided even with regard to all appeals, reviews or references, which were pending before any authority on the 9th of April, 1961 that they would abate and the Collector shall proceed with the case afresh in accordance with the amended provisions of Sec.10. Similarly, with regard to all proceedings pending on the 9th of April, 1981, barring those which had achieved finality already by the publicati


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top