(Passed on 6^th January, 2020)

The petitioner (since dead now represented through

legal heirs) has filed the present petition being aggrieved by

order dated 29.4.2011 passed by Board of Revenue, M.P.,

Gwalior in Review Petition No.712-PBR/10, whereby the

preliminary objections raised filed by him have been dismissed.

2.

Facts of the case necessary for disposal of this

petition are as under :

(i)

The M.P. Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960

(hereinafter referred to as “the Ceiling Act” for short) was

enacted by the State of M.P. on 1.10.1960 to provide for

imposition of ceiling on agricultural holdings, acquisition and

disposal of surplus land and matters ancillary thereto.

(ii) When the Ceiling Act came into force, there were many

agricultural lands and forest land in the territory of erstwhile

Dewas Senior State held in the name of petitioner's father;

Tukojirao Puar Religious and Charitable Trust; Shri Krishnajirao

Puar Religious and Charitable Trust; and Dewas Farm Project

2

Pvt. Ltd. The rulers of Dewas Senior State also owned a palace

called “Anand Bhavan Palace and land which were included in

the list of private property as ex-rulers of the erstwhile Dewas

Senior State.

(iii) The proceedings were initiated under the Ceiling Act

against the petitioner by the Additional Commissioner, Ujjain

exercising the powers of the competent authority under the

Ceiling Act, since the land was partly in Dewas District and

partly in Ratlam District and the final order was passed by the

competent authority on 18.1.1999 against the petitioner.

(iv) The petitioner filed an appeal against the aforesaid order

dated 18.1.1999 u/s. 41 of the Ceiling Act before the Board of

Revenue. The Board of Revenue allowed the appeal vide order

dated 19.5.2006 holding that the order dated 18.1.1999 is

unlawful and accordingly quashed all actions and proceedings

against the petitioner initiated under the Ceiling Act.

(v)

After the lapse of four years, the Board of Revenue has

passed the order dated 22.5.2010 in exercise of suo motu power

to review its own order dated 19.5.2006. The petitioner appeared

before the Board of Revenue by raising an objection that in the

Ceiling Act, there is no such provision of review. The provisions

of revenue u/s. 51 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code (MPLRC) are

not applicable to the authorities under the Ceiling Act. The

petitioner also raised an objection about the period of limitation

for exercising power of review.

(vi) The Board of Revenue has rejected the aforesaid

contention of the petitioner and registered the case as Suo Motu

Review 712/PBR/10-Dewas and issued the show-cause notice.

The petitioner replied to the show-cause notice in detail and also

3

raised a preliminary objection that the review is not

maintainable. On 22.9.2010, the petitioner filed the additional

reply as well as written arguments on 22.12.2010. Vide order

dated 29.4.2011, the Board of Revenue has disallowed the

preliminary objections by holding that u/s. 51 of MPLRC the

review is maintainable and fixed the case for final arguments.

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner has filed

the present petition.

Shri A.K. Chitale, learned senior counsel appearing

for the petitioner, submitted that the Board of Revenue has failed

to consider the well established principle of law that judicial or

quasi judicial authority cannot review its own order unless the

power of review is expressly conferred upon it by the statute.

The Board of Revenue has exercised the power of review under

the Ceiling Act in which there is no such provision for review

like Section 51 of the MPLRC. Even if the Board of Revenue

has borrowed the provision of Section 51 of MPLRC in order to

exercise the power of review, such review is maintainable only

against the order passed under the MPLRC subject to Section 44

and 50 of the MPLRC. There is limitation prescribed under the

MPLRC for exercising the power of review. Assuming without

admitting