IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the exercise of powers under Section 30(4)(i) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1961 requires compliance with specific conditions, including the existence of a pending appeal and final publication of draft statement.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Lalit Kishore, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Khurshid Alam, learned Additional Advocate General no.12 (AAG) appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for the following reliefs:

“i) For setting aside the Notice contained in Letter No. 1925 dated 19-07-2017 issued by the Collector, East Champaran, Motihari whereby a show cause has been issued to the petitioner as to why not the order dated 28-06-1999 passed in Ceiling Case No. 1/1996-97 be quashed and afresh Ceiling Proceeding be initiated in exercise of the power conferred under Section 30(4)(i) of the Bihar Land Reforms (fixation of ceiling area and acquisition of surplus land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as The Ceiling Act, 1961).

A true photo/type copy of the Notice contained in Letter No. 1925 Dated 19.07 2017 is annexed as Annexure 1 to this application,

ii) For any other relief/reliefs for which petitioner may be deemed entitled too.” (sic)

3. The case of the petitioner is that a ceiling proceeding bearing Ceiling Case no.3/1983-84 was initiated against the petitioner company and concluded by order dated 15.1.1983 passed by the Additional Collector (Ceiling), East Champaran, Motihari. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Collector, East Champaran, Motihari which was dismissed on 17.6.1985. Thereafter, revision was preferred before the Board of Revenue and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 6.7.1985. The petitioner preferred CWJC no.2976 of 1985 which was allowed by order dated 29.1.1997 and by the said order, the order dated 15.1.1983 passed by the Additional Collector, the order dated 17.6.1985 passed in Appeal by the Collector and the order dated 6.7.1985 passed in Revision by the Additional Member, Board of Revenue as also the findings of the Additional Collector under section 5(1)(iii) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as ‘the Act’) were all set aside. The Additional Collector (Ceiling) was directed to conduct a fresh enquiry under section 5(1)(iii) and publish a fresh draft statement as required under section 10(1) of the Act. Further, till final disposal of the matter all the parties to the proceedings were restrained from transferring or disposing of any land which was declared surplus by virtue of the impugned orders.

4. Further case of the petitioner is that the respondents were required to proceed afresh to prepare draft statement under section 10, carry out final publication of the draft statement under section 11 and issue notification under section 15 of the Act for acquisition of the surplus land. However, no further steps have been taken by the respondents.

5. It is case of the petitioner that in compliance of the direction of this Court in order dated 29.1.1997, the Additional Collector (Ceiling) proceeded to make an enquiry and passed the final order on 28.6.1999 wherein he did not find any illegality in transfer of the land in the name of the purchasers. On the purchasers presenting the sale deeds for registration, the registration was not carried out. On the purchasers approaching the District Sub-Registrar, they were communicated that restriction had been imposed on transfer of land in view of the restraining order passed in the order dated 29.1.1997. As such, one of the purchasers filed Civil Review no.410 of 2016 (Ramacast Limited vs The State of Bihar & Ors.) praying for review of the order dated 29.1.1997 passed in CWJC no.1436 of 1986. The review application was allowed holding that the pendency of the ceiling proceeding against the land holder would not be an impediment in registering the land transferred by the petitioner. The State of Bihar preferred an appeal (SLP Civil no. 4160 of 2017) in the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the order dated 27.10.2016 allowing the review application, however, the s