CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.9231 OF 1998 In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. ----- 1. Kumar Rajendra 2. Kumar Bijayendra 3. Jitendra Kumar Singh, sons of Sri Prasidh Narain Singh, residents of village Nama, P.S. Bodh Gaya, District Gaya. 4. Smt. Sunaina Devi wife of Sri Narshingh Narain Singh, resident of village Tetariya, P.S. Mufassil, district Gaya 5. Jugal Kishore Singh 6. Nand Kishore Singh, sons of Late Indradeo Singh, resident of village Jaitia, P.S. Konch, District Gaya 7. Ashok Singh 8. Anil Singh 9. Sushil Singh, sons of Sri Shyam Sundar Singh, residents of village Bohiya, P.S.Tekari, District Gaya -----------------------------------------(Petitioners) Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna 3. The Collector, District Gaya 4. The Additional Collector, Gaya 5. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms (Ceiling), Gaya 6. Sri Sidheshwar Singh son of Sri Bhujawan Singh, resident of village Kabarbigha, P.O. Koshila, P.S. Bodh Gaya, District Gaya -----------------------------------(Respondents) For The Petitioner :Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha 2, Advocate For The Respondent :Mr. Om Prakash Upadhyay, S.C.-II(Ceiling) --------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA V.N. Sinha, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and S.C.2 (Ceiling) for the State. 2. Petitioners are the heirs and legal representatives of Mostt. Deorati Kuer, as petitioner nos. 1 to 3 are the sons of Sri Prasidh Narain Singh, who was married to Smt. Kapoor Devi, daughter of Mosmat Deorati Kuer. Petitioner no.4, Smt. Sunaina Devi is the second daughter of Mosmat Deorati Kuer. Petitioner nos. 5 and 6 are the sons of 2 Induradeo Singh, who was married to Nagina Devi, the predeceased daughter of Mosmat Deorati Kuer. Petitioner nos. 7 to 9 are the sons of Shyam Sundar Singh, who was married to Panna Devi, the fourth daughter of Mosmat Deorati Kuer. 3. Petitioners have filed the present writ application praying, inter alia, to set aside the order dated 22.9.1997, passed by the Additional Member, Board of Revenue in Revision Case No. 53 of 1996, affirming the order dated 21.5.1996, passed by the Collector, Gaya in Ceiling Appeal No. 3 of 1996-97 whereunder the lands allowed in the unit of Mosmat Deorati Kuer after her death has been declared surplus as her only son Sidheshwar Singh is possessed of lands of his unit and the daughters of Mosmat Deorati Kuer including her grandsons, the petitioners have not chosen to file any objection. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that after death of Mosmat Deorati Kuer on 1.3.1981, notice was received by her son which is dated 7.9.1981, Annexure-7 calling upon him to furnish the details of the heirs and legal representatives of Mosmat Deorati Kuer, in response whereto information was furnished to the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Gaya that Mosmat Deorati Kuer died on 1.3.1981 leaving behind three daughters, namely, Smt. Kapoor Devi, wife of Sidh Narain Singh, Smt. Sunaina Devi, wife of Sri Narshingh Narain Singh and Smt. Panna Devi, wife of Shyam Sundar Singh and the heirs of predeceased daughter, Nagina Devi, namely, Jugal Kishore Singh and Nand Kishore Singh, both sons of Indradeo Singh and the lands allotted in her unit may be clubbed with them as they do not possess any surplus land. It is further submitted that without considering the aforesaid response filed by 3 Sidheshwar Singh before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Gaya on 7.9.1981, Annexure-8, the Collector of the district under orders dated 21.5.1996 declared the lands allotted to Mosmat Deorati Kuer as surplus. The Revision filed against the said order before the Board of Revenue was also dismissed under orders dated 22.9.1997 on the ground that the daughters of Mosmat Deorati Kuer and their heirs never approached the ceiling authorities for clubbing the lands of Mosmat Deorati Kuer with their lands. It is also submitted on behalf of the petitioners that once information dated 7.9.1981, Annexure-8 was filed before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Gaya, it was incumbent upon the revenue authorities to have issued notice to the three daughters and the heirs of the daughter who predeceased Mosmat Deorati Kuer, but without giving notice to them, the lands earlier given to Mosmat Deorati Kuer was declared surplus. Such declaration according to this Court is illegal and, accordingly, the two orders dated 22.9.1997, passed by the Additional Member, Board of Revenue in Revision Case No. 53 of 1996 and order dated 21.5.1996, passed by the Collector, Gaya in Ceiling Appeal No. 3 of 1996-97 is set aside with direction to the petitioners to appear before the Collector, Gaya within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and file their objection along with the certified copy of this order. The Collector should consider their objection and if it is found that they do not possess surplus land at their end even after clubbing their share in the land allotted to Mosmat Deorati Kuer such land be given to them, failing which the Collector, Gaya shall declare the lands allotted to the unit of Deorati Kuer as surplus and take 4 steps for acquisition under Section 15(1) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Lnad) Act. 5. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. 6. The proceedings have remained pending in this Court for about 12 years, in the circumstances, I direct the Collector, Gaya to conclude the proceeding as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of appearance of the petitioners before him. (V.N. Sinha, J.) Patna High Court Dated 30th March, 2010 NAFR (Arjun)