Judgment :- 1. Swamps and streams, rocks and barren lands, cleared forest area and grazing land in a plantation as defined in S.2 (44) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act,1 of 1964, for short the Act, whether their extent is to betaken into account for calculating the total extent of lands for the purpose of fixing the ceiling under Chapter III of the Act, is the question that arises for consideration in this Civil Revision filed by the State against the order of the Taluk Land Board, Mukundapuram fixing the ceiling of the respondent, a public limited company by name The Amalgamated Tea Estates Co. Ltd., Munnar. On 8-3-1976 the Taluk Land Board issued a revised draft statement to the respondent-company calling upon it to surrender 588.55 acres as excess lands. The above extent included forest lands and cleared forest area As per the draft statement, the respondent was to retain 1547.10 acres. As per Part C of the draft statement, among the lands eligible for exemption under S.81 (I) and exempted under S 81 (3) were included grazing land 18.23 acres, swamps and streams 168.33 acres and rocks and barren lands 129 74 acres As per Part B of the draft statement, the 588 55 acres to be surrendered included only cleared forest area and forest lands interspersed within tea plantation. The respondent filed objections to the draft statement and the Taluk Land Board after hearing came to the conclusion that the plantation is entitled to retain 429.85 acres as fuel area. Out of a total extent of 63315 acres consisting of cleared forest area, forest lands and 15% of the area covered by swamps, rocks etc. the respondent was directed to surrender 203 40 acres The respondent's claim of 23.23 acres as grazing land for the 140 cows in the Estate was reduced to 18.23 acres by the Taluk Land Board The above order of the Taluk Land Board was challenged by the respondent, before this Court in CRP. No. 3131 of 1976, but this Court did not interfere with the order of the Taluk Land Board. It was thereafter that S.103 of the Act was amended by Kerala Act 13 of 1976 empowering the State also to challenge the orders of the Taluk Land Board in revision under S.103 of the Act. No. 3131 of 1976, but this Court did not interfere with the order of the Taluk Land Board. It was thereafter that S.103 of the Act was amended by Kerala Act 13 of 1976 empowering the State also to challenge the orders of the Taluk Land Board in revision under S.103 of the Act. It was under the above circumstances that the State challenged the order of the Taluk Land Board in this Civil Revision Petition. 2. It was contended on behalf of the State that the Taluk Land Board went wrong in granting exemption to a total extent of 634.39 acres consisting of swamps and streams, rocks and barren lands, cleared forest area and grazing land. According to the State, the Act does not give any exemption to any of the above categories of lands and hence even if they are situated in a plantation the extent covered by the above categories of lands cannot be ignored in calculating the total extent of the lands for the purpose of fixing the ceiling. It was also pointed out that the exemption granted is arbitrary and excessive. It was contended on behalf of the respondent that as per the draft statement issued the respondent was to surrender only 588.55 acres from the cleared forest area and the forest lands interspersed within tea plantation. It was then pointed out that as per Part C of the draft statement, swamps and streams, rocks and barren lands and grazing land were included as lands eligible for exemption. Hence the learned counsel for the respondent contended that as long as the above draft statement stands, the contention advanced on behalf of the State cannot be accepted us the Taluk Land Board cannot go behind the draft statement. A contention that swamps and streams if they are in an exempted land will partake the character of that land and will have to be exempted was also taken by the learned counsel for the respondent. According to the learned counsel, the position of rocks and barren lands will not be different. The learned counsel also pointed out that the Taluk Land Board went wrong in disallowing domestic fuel requirement of staff, labour, hospital and smithy. According to the learned counsel, the State's revision has only to be rejected. 3. According to the learned counsel, the position of rocks and barren lands will not be different. The learned counsel also pointed out that the Taluk Land Board went wrong in disallowing domestic fuel requirement of staff, labour, hospital and smithy. According to the learned counsel, the State's revision has only to be rejected. 3. S.2(44) of the Act reads: "2(44) 'Plantation' means any land used by a person principally for the cultivation of tea, coffee, cocoa, rubber, cardamom or cinnamon (hereinafter in this clause referred to as 'plantation crops') and includes (a) land used by the said person for any purpose ancillary to the cultivation of plantation crops or for the preparation of the same for the market; (b) x x x x x x (c) agricultural lands interspersed within the boundaries of the area cultivated by the said person with plantation crops, not exceeding such extent as may be determined by the Land Board as necessary for the protection and efficient management of such cultivation. Explanation. Lands used for the construction of office buildings, godowns, factories, quarters for workmen, hospitals, schools and play grounds shall be deemed to be lands used for the purposes of sub-clause (a)." As per the above definition, agricultural lands interspersed within the boundaries of a plantation which, according to the Land Board, are necessary for the protection and efficient management of the plantation will also come within the definition of plantation. Cleared forest area has to be treated as agricultural land if it is fit for cultivation. So, if this area is interspersed within the plantation and if it is fit for cultivation, so much extent of the same as is necessary for the protection and efficient management of the cultivation in the plantation as determined by the Land Board has to be treated as plantation and exempted. This is necessary only as far as the cleared forest area which is interspersed within the plantation. If any portion of the cleared forest area is not interspersed within the plantation, that area will not attract any exemption. This is necessary only as far as the cleared forest area which is interspersed within the plantation. If any portion of the cleared forest area is not interspersed within the plantation, that area will not attract any exemption. As far as the swamps and streams are concerned, they partake the character of the lands in which they exist If they are in a coconut garden which is not an exempted category of land the extent covered by them no doubt cannot be ignored for the calculation of the total extent for the purpose of fixing the ceiling. If, on the other hand, they exist in an exempted category of land like a plantation, it goes without saying that they will also attract the exemption. If we take a different view, it will also lead to anomalous results. So, a specific exemption under S.81 of the Act is not necessary to ignore the extent of swamps and streams in a plantation in the calculation of the total extent for the purpose of ceiling. Rocks and barren lands if they are interspersed in a plantation have to be given the same treatment as swamps and streams. But if these lands are not interspersed in a plantation and their severance from the plantation -will not be detrimental to the protection and efficient management of the cultivation in the plantation the position will be different. Even if such lands are not interspersed, if roads are there through such lands connecting two parts of the plantation the Land Board can order surrender only after safeguarding the rights of the plantation to use the roads. As far as grazing lands are concerned there is nothing on record to show that the plantation is maintaining cows and that too for the supply of milk to the hospital and the school So, no purpose ancillary to the cultivation of plantation crops as required under S.2(44)(a) can be made out. It was wrong on the part of the Taluk Land Board to have ignored the extent of grazing land in calculating the total extent. In the matter of fuel wood the Supreme Court held in C. Veettil Ammad v. Taluk Land Board 1979 KLT 601 (AIR 1979 SC. 15731 at page 1584. para 54, that the supply of firewood to employees cannot be said to be a purpose 'ancillary to the cultivation of plantation crops'. In the matter of fuel wood the Supreme Court held in C. Veettil Ammad v. Taluk Land Board 1979 KLT 601 (AIR 1979 SC. 15731 at page 1584. para 54, that the supply of firewood to employees cannot be said to be a purpose 'ancillary to the cultivation of plantation crops'. The Taluk Land Board has disallowed the claim of firewood for the hospital and estate smithy Even as per the Supreme Court decision referred to above. I don't think this is possible because it cannot be said that the running of a hospital or a smithy by a plantation is not for any purpose ancillary to the cultivation of plantation crops. 4. If the Land Board finds that any extent of rocks and barren lands or cleared forest area is not necessary for the protection and efficient management of the plantation the Taluk Land Board can of course take a decision and direct the surrender of that extent. But this can be done only in accordance with law. As per the revised draft statement issued by the Taluk Land Board on 8 31976 the respondent did not get any opportunity to raise objections to the surrender of rocks and barren lands. As regards grazing land also the respondent did not get an opportunity to raise objections. So, it goes without saying that if the Taluk Land Board wants the respondent to surrender any extent of the rocks and barren lands, that can be had only after issuing a fresh draft statement and hearing the respondent's objections to the same. But the Taluk Land Board has to refer the question to the Land Board for its decision on the extent of cleared forest area and rocks and barren lands interspersed within the cultivated area which the plantation is entitled to retain under S.2 (44) (c) of the Act as necessary for the protection and efficient management of the cultivation. Only after a decision of the Land Board on this aspect of the matter the Taluk Land Board can issue a fresh draft statement to the respondent. There is nothing in the file to show that the Taluk Land Board referred the question of lands interspersed to the Land Board for its decision under S.2 (44) (c). The issue of the draft statements without doing this was clearly against the law. 5. There is nothing in the file to show that the Taluk Land Board referred the question of lands interspersed to the Land Board for its decision under S.2 (44) (c). The issue of the draft statements without doing this was clearly against the law. 5. In the result, the order of the Taluk Land Board impugned in this Civil Revision is set aside. The Taluk Land Board is directed to take a fresh decision in the ceiling case in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within six months from today. The Civil Revision Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs. Allowed.