JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Additional Collector dated 15.2.88 and Board of Revenue dated 18.11.1989 and 16.7.1990 on the ground that the case of ceiling of the petitioner which was earlier dropped under the Old Ceiling Act is re-opened under New Ceiling Act, 1973. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present controversy is fully covered by the Division Bench judgment rendered in the case Dhanraj & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 1995 RRD 115 where the same question was involved that "as to what is the period of limitation applicable to the proceeding under section 15 of the New Ceiling Act and whether the proceeding commenced in each of the petitions were within limitation". The Division Bench held that "when the notice issued after six years, the State Government, therefore, had no power or jurisdiction under section 15 of the Ceiling Act to direct reopening of the cases of the petitioners. 3. Following the ratio decided by the Division Bench, Coordinate Bench of this High Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2563/94 passed the judgment dated 19.10.2005; wherein also the ceiling matter was re-opened under section 15(2) of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973. As under the New Ceiling Act the period of limitation has been kept as six years from the date of commencement of the New Ceiling Law. The case of the petitioner could be re-opened only upto January 1, 1979 within six years from January 1st, 1973 when the new Act came into force. The case of petitioner was already decided on July 25, 1975, as such the notice dated April 3, 1980 for re-opening the case was beyond limitation. 4. Here, in the instant case, the case of the petitioner is already decided under the Old Ceiling Law on 17.4.1971 and now under the New Ceiling Act, under Section 15(2) the ceiling matter of the petitioner was re-opened on 18.3.1981 and this admittedly, beyond the period of six years. 5. Consequently, the ratio decided by the Division Bench in the case of Dhanraj and Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Gumani Shankar (supras) is fully apply to the petitioners' case and accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. 5. Consequently, the ratio decided by the Division Bench in the case of Dhanraj and Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Gumani Shankar (supras) is fully apply to the petitioners' case and accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The orders impugned dated 15.2.1988 passed by the Additional Collector and orders dated 18.11.1989 and 16.7.1990 passed by the Board of Revenue in appeal and revision are hereby quashed and set aside.Writ petition allowed - Orders of addl. collector and Revenue board set aside. *******