Sarwar Ali, J.: In this writ application the legality of certain orders passed, and the procedure adopted, in purported exercise of the powers conferred by the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (Bihar Act, XII of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') have been questioned. But before dealing with the contentions raised in this case, some preliminary observations are called for. 2. When the people of India gave to themselves the Constitution they declared, in unequivocal terms, their solemn resolves to secure to all the citizens: Justice, social, economic and political. This is so stated in the preamble to the Constitution: and the preamble is "a-key to open the mind of the makers." The positive 'duties set out in the preamble to the Constitution are incorporated in Part IV of the Constitution dealing with Directive Principles of the State Policy. The Directive Principles are 'fundamental in the governance of the country' and two of such principles are (i) that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to sub-serve the common good, and (ii) that the operative of the economic system does not result in the concentration to the common detriment. It was but obvious that steps will have to be taken to bring about economic justice in the agriculture sector which supports the bulk of the population of this country. The first step in this direction, even before the coming into force of the Constitution, was the abolition of intermediary interest in agricultural lands and matters connected therewith. Leaving aside the various intermediate beneficial agrarian legislations in almost all the States, the next big step was the fixation of the ceiling on agricultural holdings and disposal of surplus land thus acquired to the landless and poorer section of the community. These legislations are plainly legislations of economic and social import aimed to achieve the objects enumerated in the Directive Principles of State Policy under our Constitution. To set at rest any doubt or dispute in the orbit round the legislations and their validity, they were all included in the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution. Later, amendments were introduced lowering down the ceiling area - as originally fixed. 3. To set at rest any doubt or dispute in the orbit round the legislations and their validity, they were all included in the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution. Later, amendments were introduced lowering down the ceiling area - as originally fixed. 3. It is, however, obvious that all laws, even vital and important legislations as the Act, have to be implemented according to the provisions of the statute. In the process of implementation of a law, where the provisions thereof are disregarded or misconstrued; where what had been given or left to the citizen by the very provisions of the statute is being encroached upon; where the citizen can legitimately complain that he does not come within the purview of the statute; it is the legal and constitutional duty of the Court to see that the limit put by the law are not transgressed. And, finally, in implementation of the law, procedural safeguards and rules of natural justice have to be observed. It is only on these and other well recognised grounds and within the limitations inherent in the exercise of writ jurisdiction, that this Court will be entitled to interfere. In thus interfering the Court is only securing the compliance of law and advancing the very scheme of legislation and the true intention of the legislature. Realising, however, the need for early implementation of the legislation, this court is prepared and is indeed giving special priority to the disposal of the cases arising under the Act. 4. I shall now deal with the relevant facts giving rise to this writ application. A draft statement under section 10 of the Act, was served on petitioner no. 1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner). The objection as envisaged under section 10 (3) of the Act, was filed before the Collector. The gist of the objection was that, for the reasons mentioned in the application the petitioner was not holding land beyond the ceiling area. 6th November, 1974 was the date fixed for hearing the objection. That was "Bund day". According to the petitioner, his lawyers Sarvashri Ram Nandan Thakur and Ram Chandra Sharma were prevented from attending the Court on that day. The petitioner, therefore, filed an application before' the learned Collector stating the aforesaid fact and praying for adjournment of the hearing. The learned Collector by his order dated the 6th November, 1974 (Annexure 4') rejected the prayer aforesaid. The petitioner, therefore, filed an application before' the learned Collector stating the aforesaid fact and praying for adjournment of the hearing. The learned Collector by his order dated the 6th November, 1974 (Annexure 4') rejected the prayer aforesaid. According to the order, the ground for adjournment was not reasonable as despite the "Bund day" some lawyers had appeared in other cases. The learned Collector, therefore, ordered for taking action for final publication under section 11 (1) of the Act. On the 6th December, 1974, well within time prescribed by law, petitioner no.1 preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Tirhut Division. During the pendency of the appeal the draft statement was finally published in pursuance of the provision of section 11 (1) of the Act, and the proposal was sent to the Government for publication in the official gazette, The learned Commissioner on account of the aforesaid final publication held, on the 18th June, 1975, that the appeal had become infructuous and consequently dismissed the appeal (Annexure "5"). A revision was filed before the Board of Revenue which too was dismissed summarily on the 18th July, 1975 on the same ground. The petitioner thereafter filed this application. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the orders of the learned Commissioner and Additional Member, Board of Revenue were fit to be quashed. He contended that the authorities aforesaid had committed an error apparent on the face of the record in holding that the appeal and the revision have become infructuous. The learned counsel further contended that the order of the learned Collector was also fit to be quashed, as the petitioner had not been given reasonable opportunity of being heard and adducing evidence as required under section 10 (3) of the Act. 6. In order to appreciate the contention raised, it would be necessary to refer to the scheme of the Act, and the relevant provisions relating thereto. Section 6 envisages public notice upon all the land-holders of the State who hold land in excess of the ceiling area to submit returns within thirty days of the date specified in the notice, containing particulars as mentioned in section 6 (1) of the Act. The substance of the notice has to be published in the official gazette, as also in less than three issue of at least two newspapers having circulation in the State of Bihar. The substance of the notice has to be published in the official gazette, as also in less than three issue of at least two newspapers having circulation in the State of Bihar. The Collector has been given power to extend the time for submission of return by a period not exceeding thirty days. Section 7 of the Act, authorizes, the Collector to obtain information through other agencies. Section 8 of the Act, authorises the Collector to require a land-holder to submit return in the circumstances under sub-clause (1) of the Act. Section 10 of the Act, empowers the Collector, on the basis of information given by or on behalf of the land holder or the information obtained by the Collector to cause a draft statement to be prepared containing particulars as mentioned in section 10 (1) of the Act. The draft statement so prepared has to be published at such place and in such manner as may be prescribed and a copy thereof has to be served in the prescribed manner on the land holder. Sub section (3) of section 10 of the Act, gives right of objection to the draft statement to the land holders. The sub-section is as follows : "(3) Any objection to the draft statement received within thirty days of the publication, or service thereof under sub-section (2) which-ever is later, shall be considered by the Collector who shall, after giving the parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard and adducing evidence, pass such order as he thinks fit." It is, therefore, clear that the objection to the draft statement has to be disposed of by the Collector after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard and adducing evidence to the parties concerned. Section 11 of the Act, deals with the final publication of the draft statement and is an important provision. It may, therefore, be quoted below in full : 11. Section 11 of the Act, deals with the final publication of the draft statement and is an important provision. It may, therefore, be quoted below in full : 11. "Final publication of draft statement: (1) When the objection under sub-section (3) of section 10, appeal and revision if any relating there to have been disposed of, the Collector shall make such alteration in the draft statement as may be necessary to give effect to any order passed on the objection or on appeal or revision and shall cause the said statement with the alteration, if any to be finally published at such places and in such manner as may be prescribed under sub-section (2) of section 10 and a copy thereof duly certified by the Collector in the prescribed manner shall be given to the land-holder concerned. (2) The statement published under sub-section (1) shall be conclusive evidence of the facts stated therein for the purposes of this Act, and shall not be called in question in any court. (3) Copies of such statement duly authenticated in the prescribed manner shall be sent by the Collector within such period and to such authority or authorities, as may be prescribed. The true import of the various provisions will have to be considered later. It is sufficient at present to indicate that after final publication of the draft statement under section 11 of the Act, step for acquisition of surplus land can be taken. The relevant provision in relation thereto is section 15 of the Act. This too has to be quoted (except sub-clause (5) with which we are not concerned in this case). 15. "Acquisition of surplus land :-(1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (5), the State Govt. shall, after the final publication of the statement under subsection (1) of section 11, acquire the surplus land by publishing in the official Gazette a notification to the effect that such land is required for a public purpose and such publication shall be conclusive evidence of the notice of the acquisition to the person or persons concerned. shall, after the final publication of the statement under subsection (1) of section 11, acquire the surplus land by publishing in the official Gazette a notification to the effect that such land is required for a public purpose and such publication shall be conclusive evidence of the notice of the acquisition to the person or persons concerned. ¼2½ mi /kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu vf/klwpuk izdkf’kr gksus ij] vf/klwpuk es fofufnZ”V Hkwfe] bl vf/kfu;e ds mica/kks ds v/;/khu vf/klwpuk dh rkjh[k ls bl vf/kfu;e ds iz;kstukFkZ vftZr vkSj lHkh _.kHkkjks ls eqDr :i es jkT; es fufgr le>h tk;xh vkSj mles fgr dk nkok djus okys lHkh O;fDr;ks ds lkjs vf/kdkj] gd vkSj fgr bl rkjh[k ls fuokZfir le>s tk;saxsA ¼3½ mi&/kkjk 1 ds v/khu vf/klwpuk izdkf’kr gksus ij vf/klwpuk es fofufn”V Hkwfe es fgr dk nkok djus okyk dksbZ O;fDr ,sls izdk’ku ds rhl fnuks ds Hkhrj] dyDVj ds le{k nkok is’k dj ldsxkA (4) On such claim being filed, the Collector shall, after giving the parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard and adducing evidence, decide the matter and record the reasons for the decision. X X X X mi /kkjk 4 vkSj 5 ds mica/kks] rFkk vihy ;k iqujh{k.k ij fn;s x;s fdlh vkns’k ds v/;/khu] dyDVj] mi&/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu vf/klwpuk izdkf’kr gksus ds ckn fdlh Hkh le;] mDr vf/klwpuk es fofufnZ”V fdlh Hkwfe dks vius dCts es ys ldsxk vkSj blds iz;kstukFkZ ;Fkko’;d cy dk iz;ksx dj ldsxkA 7. It is not necessary to give the scheme of the Act, after acquisition of surplus land in relation to the disposal of surplus land, compensation etc. as we are not concerned with these provisions in this writ application. 8. I have already, quoted section 11 of the Act. The question that arises for consideration is as to what is the stage at which the Collector is authorised to make final publication of the draft statement after disposal of the objection under section 10 (3) of the Act. Will be have to wait for the expiry of period of appeal or revision before he can validly finally publish a draft statement? The answer must be in the affirmative. This section clearly says that it is after disposal of the objection, appeal and revision that the Collector shall make alteration in the draft statement. Will be have to wait for the expiry of period of appeal or revision before he can validly finally publish a draft statement? The answer must be in the affirmative. This section clearly says that it is after disposal of the objection, appeal and revision that the Collector shall make alteration in the draft statement. It is clear that unless the stage of alteration in relation to the draft statement is past, the occasion to finally publish the statement does not arise. On a plain reading of the section it appears to me that as long as alteration in the draft statement is legally permissible in view of the pendency of the appeal or revision, there cannot be final publication of the draft statement. Subsection (2) of Section 11 of the Act, says that the statement published under sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Act, shall be conclusive evidence of the fact stated therein and shall not be called in question in any court. If the draft statement can be published during the pendency of the appeal or revision by virtue of sub-section (2) of section 11 of the Act, aforesaid, the decision in appeal or revision may become meaningless. Such could not be intention of the Legislature and that is why the Legislature has been careful enough to indicate that it is after disposal of the objection, appeal or revision that final publication has to take place. I must state that the learned Government Advocate saw force in this interpretation and could not seriously challenge it except that he said that it would not be necessary to wait till the expiry of period of filing of revision or the disposal of revision before taking action for final publication. 9. The main reason advanced by the learned Government Advocate for making the differentiation between appeal and revision, is that whereas a period has been fixed for filing of appeal under section 30 of the Act, there is no period of limitation for the exercise of power of revision under section 32 of the Act. We have, however, been informed at the Bar that the period of limitation for filing revisions as prescribed by the Hoard's Practice Procedure Manual in all revenue matters is thirty days and that is the practice which is being followed. We have, however, been informed at the Bar that the period of limitation for filing revisions as prescribed by the Hoard's Practice Procedure Manual in all revenue matters is thirty days and that is the practice which is being followed. Of course in respect of both the power of appeal as also the power of revision, there is power of condonation of delay. In my view the differentiation suggested by the learned Government Advocate between the appeal and revision, so far as section 11 of the Act, is concerned, cannot be accepted. Section 11 (1) of the Act, puts both the appeal and revision on the same footing. What is applicable in relation to appeal, is clearly applicable in relation to revision. It, however, does not mean that the authorities have to wait indefinitely, because of there being no limitation for the suo motu exercise of power of revision under section 32 of the Act. They have only to wait for the period of limitation prescribed under section 30 of the Act, so far as the appeals are concerned and the period prescribed in Board's Miscellaneous Rules as the period within which revisions have to be filed. It necessarily follows that once an appeal has been filed, the authorities have to wait till the disposal thereof and the expiry of period of revision before taking any action under section 11 (1) of the Act. Similarly, where a revision has actually been filed after the expiry of disposal of appeal, the Collector has to wait till the actual disposal of the revision application. I may, however, observe that the landholders would be well-advised when they file an appeal or revision, to apprise the Collector of the factum of filing of the appeal or revision to avoid unnecessary complications. In view of the above discussion it necessarily follows that where the prepared draft statement has been prematurely published. It is not a publication in accordance with the provision of section 11 of the Act. Such a publication cannot bar consideration of an appeal or revision by the competent authorities. 10. It may same times happen that the appeal or revision is not preferred within the prescribed time. The Collector after having waited for the expiry of the period of limitation finally publishes the draft statement. Subsequently, an appeal or revision is filed, entertained and the delay condoned. 10. It may same times happen that the appeal or revision is not preferred within the prescribed time. The Collector after having waited for the expiry of the period of limitation finally publishes the draft statement. Subsequently, an appeal or revision is filed, entertained and the delay condoned. The question arises whether in such a situation, the authorities will be incompetent to decide the appeal in view of the final publication. In my view, even in such cases the power of appellate or revisional Court will not be affected. Once the appeal or revision is disposed of, if any alteration in the draft statement is required because of those decisions, they have to be made. The publication in section 11(1) must be held to be subject to the result of appeal or revision. If it were not so, the power given under the proviso to sections 30 and 32 of the Act, would become otoise. Not only on the' general principle that any order of any inferior authority must be subject to the result of appeal or revision, but also in order to harmoniously construe the provisions of section 30 and 32 of the Act, with the provision of section 11 of the Act, it must be held that final publication of draft statement cannot defeat the effect of decision in appeal or revision. Final publication under section 11 and the publication in the official Gazette under section 15 (1) shall stand modified as a result of decision in appeal or revision. 11. Sub-section (1) of section 15 envisages acquisition of surplus land by publication of a notification in the Official Gazette to the effect that such surplus land is required for public purposes. It also envisages that the publication aforesaid shall be conclusive evidence of the notice of acquisition to the person or persons concerned The expression 'person' or 'persons' concerned in this sub-clause must refer to the person or persons on whom draft statement as envisaged under section 10 of the Act, has been served in the prescribed manner, as also such other persons who had been given notice of the proceeding. It does not mean public at large. The effect of such publication has been described under sub-clause (2) of section 15 of the Act, and has the effect of extinguishing the interest of all persons claiming interest in land specified in the notification. It does not mean public at large. The effect of such publication has been described under sub-clause (2) of section 15 of the Act, and has the effect of extinguishing the interest of all persons claiming interest in land specified in the notification. But this sub-section must be read subject to sub-section (3) which entitles any person claiming interest in the land specified in the notification to file claim before the Collector, which claim has to be adjudicated as required under sub-section (4). Reading sub-section (1) to (4) together and giving them a harmoneous construction so as to avoid conflict and inconsistency amongst the various subsections inter se it must be held that if the objection raised before the Collector under sub-section (3) succeeds, the interest of the successful claimant cannot be effected by the publication under sub-section (1). 12. Section 15 (3) of the Act, fixes the time, within which the claim has to be preferred. It is thirty days of the publication in the official gazette. If a claim is not filed within the (aforesaid period, the Collector, In view of section 5 of the Limitation Act, shall have power in suitable cases to condone the delay in the filing of the claim. I think, it would be appropriate at this stage to observe that the provision of publication only in the Official Gazette may not in many cases mean real notice to the interested persons. We are told that apart from the Bihar Gazette, District Gazettes are also published and in many cases the publication aforesaid is in the District Gazette, it is a matter of common knowledge that hardly any villager or for that matter even the people in the town read these Gazettes. It is too much to expect that every landholder should' go on consulting the Gazettes in order to find out whether his land has not been wrongly included in any of the publications made under section 15 (1) of the Act. In my view the authorities concerned will be advancing the cause of real justice, if they condone the delay in late filing of claims where they are satisfied that the contention of the claimant is bonafide that he had no knowledge of the purported acquisition. In my view the authorities concerned will be advancing the cause of real justice, if they condone the delay in late filing of claims where they are satisfied that the contention of the claimant is bonafide that he had no knowledge of the purported acquisition. The State Government may also consider the desirability of some such provision like publication of notice in the village concerned along with the publication in the Official Gazette. I may also state that in some other States there is provision of general notice as indicated above. 13. Section 15 (4) of the Act, requires that the parties concerned should have reasonable opportunity of being heard and adducing evidence. Although what would be reasonable opportunity, depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, yet it must be emphasised that this important provision has to be clearly borne in mind in disposal of claims under subsection (4). 14. Now only remains to consider sub-section (6) of section 15 of the Act. This subsection authorises a Collector at any time after publication of notification' under sub section (1) to take possession of any land specified in the said notification. But this power has been made subject to the provision of sub-sections (4) and (5) and any order passed on 'appeal or revision. It, therefore, follows that where a claim has been filed, the Collector should stay his hands in respect of taking possession of land covered by the claim, pending disposal thereof. He has also to wait for the expiry of period of appeal or revision before taking further steps. Also where appeals or revisions have been filed, the Collector has to wait till the decision in the appeal or revision. Even if some action is taken during the pendency of the appeal or revision, it would be subject to the result thereof and the right of person ultimately succeeding in his claim cannot be defeated by the mere fact that possession has been taken of the land in question. It may, however, be clarified that the pendency of the claim requires the Collector to stay his hands only in respect of the claimed portion. So far as the other lands are concerned, the Collector shall be entitled to take possession, subject to the limitation as has been explained in relation to' section 11 (1) of the Act. 15. It may, however, be clarified that the pendency of the claim requires the Collector to stay his hands only in respect of the claimed portion. So far as the other lands are concerned, the Collector shall be entitled to take possession, subject to the limitation as has been explained in relation to' section 11 (1) of the Act. 15. Having dealt with the relevant provisions of the Act, the impugned orders may now be examined. The learned Commissioner and the Additional Member, Board of Revenue were of the opinion that the appeal or revision filed by the petitioner have become infructuous because of the final publication under section 11 (1) of the Act. For the reasons already discussed, it is clear that the view of law taken by the aforesaid authorities is not correct. The impugned orders '(Annexures "5" and "6")' are, therefore, fit to be quashed, suffering as they do from an error of law apparent on the face of the record. 16. Ordinarily, the authorities aforesaid should have been directed to re-consider and decide the appeal or revision on merits, but since in this case for reasons to be discussed presently, the order of the Collector (Annexure "4") suffers from incurable infirmity, the proper course would be to quash the order of the learned Collector also and direct that the claim of the petitioner be adjudicated in the first instance, by the Collector after giving the petitioner reasonable opportunity of being heard and adducing such evidence as the petitioner may be advised. 17. In the instant case the petitioner prayed for time as his lawyer could not come to Court because of the 'Bundh'. The fact is not denied or is in dispute. It is a matter of common knowledge that on that particular day (6.11.1974), because of picketing and coercion, a large number of lawyers were not able to attend Courts. In that situation the refusal of adjournment amounts to denial of reasonable opportunity as envisaged under section 10 (1) of the Act. Even if this section had not specifically mentioned about the reasonable opportunity being afforded to the c1aimant, it is clear that the requirement of giving reasonable opportunity of presenting one's case, is a well recognised requirement of rules of the natural justice. Unreasonable refusal of adjournment, in my view, violates the principles of natural justice. Even if this section had not specifically mentioned about the reasonable opportunity being afforded to the c1aimant, it is clear that the requirement of giving reasonable opportunity of presenting one's case, is a well recognised requirement of rules of the natural justice. Unreasonable refusal of adjournment, in my view, violates the principles of natural justice. Reference in this connection may be made to the two decisions of the English Court, namely, Rose Vs. Hukbles 1970 (1) W.L.R. 1061 and R. Vs. Thames Magistrate's Court 1974 (2) All E.R. 1210. These cases take the view that improper refusal to grant adjournment and failure to give reasonable opportunity to a party to prepare his case amounts to breach of rules of natural justice. I respectfully concur in the said view. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the order of the learned Collector refusing adjournment and directing publication under section 11 of the Act, is also fit to be quashed. 18. Before I part with the case, I must acknowledge the assistance and fair advocacy of the learned counsel for the parties. 19. In the result, this application is allowed, the orders contained in Annexures 4', 5' and 6' are quashed, and the learned Collector is directed to dispose of the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law. In order to expedite the hearing of claim, we direct the petitioner to present himself before the Collector on 1.10.75, and adduce evidence before him on that date, or such other adjourned date as the learned Collector may deem fit and proper, in support of his claim. I agree. Application allowed.