JUDGMENT : K. Ramamurthy, Member. - This is an appeal under Section 33(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 against order dated 11-8-1982 passed by the Competent Authority in U. L. C. Case No. 272/76. 2. As per Final Statement the appellant held total land to the extent of Ac. 2.496.5 Kadi. Competent Authority has given four ceilings to the appellant and his three sons. After deducting four ceiling limits, measuring 1.980 acres, the surplus is Ac.0.516.5. Appellant has three major sons and three major daughters. The deceased wife of the appellant purchased 0.947 acre. She died in 1959. Mother's property will be inherited by sons and daughters. Each one is entitled for Ac. 0.157. Three daughters get Ac.O.471. If this is allowed, there will be no surplus according to the appellant. 3. Shri S.K Dagara, Advocate appears for the appellant. He points out that an area of 0.835.5 recorded as agricultural land had been converted to ditches in consequence of digging of earth for brick kiln. These are unfit for construction of building. This cannot be treated as vacant land. Therefore, there is no surplus. 4. Additional Standing Counsel points out that 0.650 acre will be excluded because this is Patha land inside river Mahanadi. Appellant filed an affidavit before this Court saying that an area of Ac. 0.485 is Patha lands and this is inside river Mahanadi. 5. He further points out that Collector has recommended to Government for exemption of Ac.0.835.5 of agricultural land converted to ditches in consequence of digging of earth of brick kiln. Final statement is issued subject to Government order. 6. Shri Dagara, Advocate argues that no reference to Government is necessary as brick kiln area is not suitable for construction of building and as such it should be excluded. 7. I agree with Shri Dagara that daughters are entitled to share of their mother's property. I also agree that brick kiln area is unfit for building construction. Only for agricultural land reference to Government is necessary under Section 2 (o). 8. I would, therefore, accept the appeal and declare that there is no surplus land in this case. No reference to Government is necessary. Final Result : Allowed