Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, KULDEEP MATHUR
Raghvendra Singh Son Of Late Shri Bheem Singh Ji – Appellant
Versus
Board Of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer – Respondent
Judgment
Per, Shree Chandrashekhar, J.
These Special Appeals are directed against the writ Court's decision not to interfere with the orders passed by the Board of Revenue on 26th October 1993 and 9th September 1997 whereby the decision of the authorized Officer to resume 336 bigha and 4 biswa land from the appellants was approved by it.
2. Raghvendra Singh and Manvendra Singh both son of late Bheem Singh Ji claiming themselves to be the residents of Beenawas within Tehsil Bilara in the district of Jodhpur have approached this Court through D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.21 of 2020 to question the order dismissing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3930 of 1997. By filing D.B. Special Appeal No.64 of 2017, Pratap Singh who was the respondent no.5 in the aforementioned writ proceedings has also laid a challenge to the said decision of the writ Court rendered on 16th August 2016.
3. Briefly stated, a proceeding was drawn against Bheem Singh Ji and his family members under the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holding Act 1973 (in short, ‘Rajasthan Ceiling Act’) the provisions of which had come into force with effect from 1st January 1973. Pursuant thereto, an inquiry was caused and
The State Government cannot re-open concluded ceiling proceedings under the Rajasthan Ceiling Act beyond the prescribed limitation period, rendering such actions invalid.
The authorities must provide reasoned judgments, adhering to statutory definitions of land classification to ensure fair judicial processes in surplus determinations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an order under Section 13(A) of the Act of 1960 can only be recalled if there is a mistake apparent on the face of the record, and the prescri....
Reopening of land ceiling cases after a long period without valid reasons violates natural justice and lacks jurisdiction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a quasi judicial authority cannot review its own order unless the power of review is expressly conferred on it by the Statute under which it d....
The court clarified that subsequent ceiling proceedings do not annul earlier proceedings unless explicitly stated, highlighting legislative intent.
Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act does not permit retroactive scrutiny of land transfers pre-dating statutory cut-off; failure to follow judicial precedents constitutes a breach of natural j....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
