( 1 ) THE petitioners in this matter are the family members of one Ambalal Chhotalal Patel and the point which is raised by them in this petition is whether the lands admeasuring 48 acres and 36 gunthas found surplus under the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Celling Act 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) can be acquired without issuing the notices to them under sub-sec. (2) of sec. 20 of the said Act.

( 2 ) SHORT facts relating to this petition are that Ambalal Chhotalal Patel is the husband of petitioner No. 1 and the father of petitioners Nos. 2 and 3. It is said that various lands held by Ambalal Chhotalal Patel were partitioned as early as 30th July 1956 by a regular deed of partition which was also registered. After the said partition relevant entries were made in the Record of Rights and were certified on or about 24th February 1958

( 3 ) THEREAFTER Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act 1960 (XXVII of 1961 came into force on 24th August 1961 The lands in question are situated in Padvania village taluka Jhagadia in Broach District. The ceiling area fixed under the Act is 84 acres. Proceedings were taken by the authorities concerned under the said Act and during the course of these proceedings it was found that said Ambalal Chhotalal Patel was holding surplus land admeasuring 48 acres and 36 gunthas This surplus was found after applying the provisions of sec. 6 (2) of the Act which says that where an individual who holds land is a member of a family and land is also separately held by such individuals spouse or minor children then the land held by the individual and the said members of the individuals family shall be grouped together for the purposes of this Act. In view of these provisions of sub-sec. (2) of sec. 6 the land held by the petitioners were grouped together with the land held by Ambalal and it was on account of this grouping that the Tribunal found that Ambalal was holding surplus land admeasuring 48 acres and 36 gunthas. It is found from the record of the case that Ambalal thereafter filed Appeal which was decided against him by the Assistant Collector Rajpipla Ambalal also preferred Revision Application before the Revenue Tribunal Ahmedabad but failed there also.

( 4 ) IN this petition the petitioners have raised many contentions but the only contention which is pressed by the petitioners is that the land found surplus cannot vest in the Government so long as the notice contemplated by sub-sec. (2) of sec. 20 of the Act is not served on them. The rest of the contentions raised by the petitioners in this petition are covered by one or the other judgment of this Court as well as the Supreme Court and therefore they were neither pressed nor raised during the course of the arguments. In view of this position we shall straightaway consider the relevant provisions of the Act with a view to decide whether the notice contemplated by sub-sec (2) of sec20 of the Act was required to be given to the petitioners.

( 5 ) SEC. 20 of the Act contemplates publication of the list and notices to persons affected by the list prepared under sec. 13 of the Act. In order to understand the provisions contained in sec. 20 and 13 reference will be required first to be made to sec. 10 which contempletes that the holders of the lands in excess of ceiling area should furnish particulars of the land held by them to the concerned Mamlatdars. This section is in the following terms:-10 Every person holding land (including exempted land if any) in excess of the ceiling area whether as owner or tenant or partly as owner and partly as tenant on or after the appointed day shall in respect of all the lands including exempted land if any held by him furnish within a period of ninety days from the appointed day to each of the Mamlatdars in whose jurisdiction any piece of such land is situate a true statement specifying:- (1) particulars of all lands including their survey numbers and areas; (2) particulars of all exempted lands if