Honble ARORA, J. – This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 8.1.86 passed by the learned Single Judge, by which the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner-appellants and maintained the order passed by the Board of Revenue.

(2). Appellants Amb Singh and Jai Singh Sons of Shri Moti Singh, were recor- ded as co-tenants in the Jamabandi of Samvat Years 2001 to 2005 with respect to 466 Bighas 11 Biswas of land situated in village Sikwasra Tehsil Bhinmal district Jalore. This land they inherited from their father. By way of partition dated 21.1.68 recorded in the Bahi maintained by them, 261 Bighas (equivalent to 40.95 standard acres) of the land came to the share of Jai Singh while 205 Bighas 11 Biswas of the land came to the share of Amb Singh. This partition was got registered in the Office of the Sub-Registrar on 28.5.70. In pursuance to this partition, mutation was, also, sanctioned on 21.8.71 and necessary entries were made in the revenue records.

(3). Both the brothers filed separate declarations under rule 9 of the Rajasthan Tenancy (Fixation of Ceiling of Land) Government Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred as `the Rules) before the Sub- Divisional Officer, Bhinmal for the determination of the ceiling area applicable to them. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Bhinmal, by his order dated 31.5.75 decided the petitioners cases and determined the ceiling area applicable to them. The Sub- Divisional Officer recognised and accepted the partition dated 21.1.68 but held that the petitioner-appellants, being the co- tenants /co-parceners, are entitled to equal share in the land and, therefore, each of the petitioner-appellant is entitled to hold 37.12 standard acres of the land. Considering the number of the family members of appellant Jai Singh, he found that he is not having any excess (surplus) land; but as the number of the family members of appellant Amb Singh were less than five so he found that he has surplus land of 7.12 standard acres in his possession which is resumable. Consequently, the Sub-Divisional Officer ordered for the resumption of 51 Bighas 11 Biswas of the surplus land specified in the order which shall vest in the State.

(4). Both the appellants preferred appeals before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Jodhpur. The Revenue Appellate Authority, by its judgment dt. 20.10.75 recognised the partition dated 21.1.68 and allowed the appeal filed by appellant Jai Singh in whole while the appeal filed by appellant Amb Singh was partly allowed and the Revenue Appellate Authority held that Amb Singh was having only 23 Bighas one Biswas of surplus land which is to be resumed.

(5). The State preferred a revision petition before the Board of Revenue, Raja- sthan, Ajmer. The Board of Revenue, by its judgment dated 27.10.79 allowed the revision petition filed by the State, set-aside the order dated 20.10.75 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Jodhpur and restored the order dated 31.5.75 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bhinmal. Aggrieved with the judgment dated 27.10.79 passed by the Board of Revenue, the appellants preferred a writ petition before this Court which was dismissed by the learned Singh Judge by His judgment dated January 8, 1986. It is against this judgment that the appellant- petitioners have preferred this appeal.

(6). It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that (i) the partition under the Hindu Law is not a `transfer and it has to be recognised and given effect-to while determining the ceiling area even if the partition was effected after the appointed date/notified date, i.e., 1.4.1966; (ii) when the transfers effected after the appointed date/notified date, i.e., 1.4.1966, can be recognised for determining the ceiling area, if they satisfy the requirement of Section 30-DD of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred as `the Act) the partitions which have been saved by the operation of the Old Ceiling Law cannot be ignored merely because it h

Click Here to Read the rest of this document