Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 979 (RAJ)

Amar Chand v. State of Rajasthan

2005-04-04

GOVIND MATHUR

body2005
Judgment Govind Mathur, J.-This writ petition is directed against the order dated 17.06.1995 passed by Additional Collector (ceiling), Pali. By order impugned the Additional Collector (Ceiling), Pali refused to entertain review petition preferred by the petitioner being incompetent on the count that a transferee do not have a right to appeal and application of principles of natural justice is excluded as a necessary implication. 2. The contention of Counsel for the petitioner is that in view of Full Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Kesa vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 1987 RLW 1, although a transferee has no right to be heard and no notice need to be given to him in ceiling proceedings, but it does not exclude a transferee to get his grievance redressed by way of filing an appeal or an application to review an order. To substantiate the contention a reliance has been placed upon a Division Bench decision give in DB Civil Writ Petition No. 1229/1980, Smt. Gatudi, vs. The Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer & Ors., dated 17.07.1995, wherein Division Bench of this Court held as under:- "Although, as per the Full Bench decision of this Court in Kesas case (Supra), a transferee has no right to be heard and no notice need to be given to a transferee in the ceiling proceedings but if any order is passed against a transferee in the ceiling proceedings in his absence then the transferee being an aggrieved party can certainly avail the further remedy of filing an appeal before the learned Revenue Appellate Authority and such an appeal is neither barred by the provisions of Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure nor it is barred by the provisions of Rule 51 of the Rajasthan Tenancy (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) (Government) Rules, 1963, which provides that the appeals from orders passed under these rules shall be governed by the provisions of Section 225 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955. Section 225 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act provides that an appeal shall lie from the final order passed on an application of the nature specified in the Third Schedule and from such other orders as are mentioned in Section 212 of this Act and in Section 104 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to the Collector, if such order is passed by a Tehsildar; to the Revenue Appellate Authority, if such order is passed by an Assistant Collector, a Sub-Divisional Officer or a Collector and to the Board of Revenue if such order is passed by Revenue Appellate Authority. Since in this case, the Exhibit -1 was passed by a the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bali and, therefore, appeal was filed before the Revenue Appellate Authority. The right to file such an appeal by the transferee is not barred by any provisions of chapter III-B of the Act or the provisions of the Rajasthan Tenancy (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) (Government) Rules, 1963. In this view of the matter, the contention of Mr. L.R. Mehta, the learned Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 5 to 7 that the petitioner was not entitled to file any appeal even if he/she being an aggrieved party, cannot be sustained. What is barred is a notice to the transferee in ceiling proceedings but the remedy is not barred." 3. In view of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Smt. Gatudi (Supra), there is no dispute that remedy of appeal is available to a transferee. A statutory power to review an order is given to the Board of Revenue and other revenue Courts under Section 229 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1955"). Section 229 of the Act of 1955 reads as under:- 229. Power of review by Board and other revenue Courts-Subject to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act V of 1908)- (1) the Board on its own motion or on the application of a party to a suit or proceeding, may review and may rescind, alter or confirm any decree or order made by itself or by any of its members; and (2) everyrevenue Court, other than the Board, shall be competent to review any decree, order of Judgment passed by such Court." 4. Under Sub-section (1) of Section 229 of the Act of 1955 the Board is empowered to review, rescind, alter or confirm any decree or order made by itself or by any of its members at its own motion or on the application of a party to a suit or proceedings. Under Sub-section (2) of Section 229 of the Act of 1955 a wide power is given to every revenue Court to review any decree, order or Judgment passed by such Court. Under Sub-section (1) of Section 229 of the Act of 1955 powers to review an order or decree can be exercised by the Board at its own motion or on the application of a party to a suit or proceedings but under Sub-section (2) of Section 229 of the said Act the powers with revenue Court other than the Board of Revenue are quite wide and these powers can be operated by the revenue Court at its own or on application of any party if sufficient grounds are available to review an order or decree. It no where restricts transferee to get the order reviewed. 5. The petitioners submitted an application to the Additional Collector (Ceiling), Pali to exercise the powers under Sub-section (2), of Section 229 of the Act of 1955. The Court below was not right in refusing to entertain the application for review on the ground that a transferee is having no right to appeal. The Court below should have entertained the review petition and could have also exercised the powers to review a decree or order if any sufficient reason as prescribed under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC was available with it. 6. For the reasons stated above, the order impugned dated 17.06.1995 passed by Additional Collector (Ceiling), Pali is hereby quashed and the writ petition is allowed. Respondent Additional Collector (Ceiling), Pali is directed to entertain the application preferred by the petitioner under Sub-section (2) of Section 229 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 and to decide the same in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of certified copy of this order is served upon him by the petitioners.