The court clarified that unencumbered land should be surrendered in preference to encumbered land when an assessee fails to surrender the surplus land in terms of the provisions of Section 30E of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955.

1. These petitions directed against judgment dated 7.2.13 of Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, dismissing the revision petitions preferred by the petitioners herein, aggrieved by order dated 26.5.07, passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Jodhpur allowing the appeals preferred by the private respondents, were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. Briefly stated that the relevant facts are that late Shri Ajit Singh was a khatedar tenant of different categories of agriculture land situated in revenue villages namely, Bisalpur, Chawandia (Tehsil-Jaitaran) and Narlai (Tehsil-Desuri). The ceiling proceedings were initiated against him under Chapter IIIB of Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 ( for short “the Act of 1955”) by the Sub Divisional Officer (SDO), Jodhpur, who while accepting the declaration in Form-Ceiling IV furnished by Shri Ajit Singh under Rule 9 of Rajasthan Tenancy (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) (Government) Rules, 1963, vide order dated 4.10.71 determined the land in excess of ceiling area in the hands of Shri Ajit Singh and directed the Tehsildars, Jodhpur, Jaitaran and Desuri to take possession of the land surrendered. However, the State Government, after calling for the record of the ceiling case and for the reasons recorded in writing, vide order dated 1.7.76 being satisfied that the order passed by the authorised officer dated 4.7.71 was in contravention of the provisions of Chapter III of the Act of 1955 and was prejudicial to the State Government, directed reopening of the ceiling case against late Shri Ajit Singh under Section 15(2) of Rajasthan Imposing of Ceiling on Agriculture Holdings Act, 1973 (for short “the Act of 1973”) and referred the matter to the Additional Collector to decide it afresh in accordance with law. The Additional Collector vide order dated 28.12.81 determined the lands in excess of the ceiling limits in the hands of late Shri Ajit Singh and directed to acquire surplus land ad measuring 4020-13 bighas, situated in different revenue villages. Aggrieved thereby, two sons of late Shri Ajit Singh namely Sobhag Singh and Swaroop Singh (since deceased) and 26 transferees claiming themselves to be bona fide purchasers, preferred in all 27 appeals before the Board of Revenue, which stood disposed of by a common judgment dated 31.7.84, whereby the decision of the Additional Collector, Jodhpur dated 28.12.81 was set aside and the matter was remanded for further inquiry and decision afresh with the directions in the following terms:

“27. I, therefore, allow all these 2 appeals by this common judgment, set aside the decision of the Additional Collector, Jodhpur dated 28.12.81 and remand this case to him with the directions that he shall give a reasonable appertunity of being heard to the transferees-appellants in Ceiling Appeals Nos. 38 to 44 of 1982 Ceiling appeals Nos.61 to 78 of 1982 and ceiling appeal No.108 of 1982 of this Board. He shall further enquire and decide as to who were the members of the family of deceased Ajit Singh as on 1.4.1966 in accordance with the definition of term family as given in section 30B(a) of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955. He shall further decide whether the alleged transfers by Ajit Singh in favour of the transferee-appellants should be recognised or not having regard to the previous contained in section 30DD of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955. In deciding the question of recognition or non-recognition of the alleging transfers, he shall give a definite finding if the transferees were agriculturist as explained in Explanation 1 to Section 30DD and whether they were domiciled in Rajasthan. He shall also examine the question of the necessity of registration of the sale-deeds keeping in view section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act 1882 and the provisions of the Registration Act and other relevant circumstances. Thereafter, he shall decide the ceiling case of Ajit Singh only considering Swaroop Singh and Sobhag Singh as legal representatives