JUDGMENT 1. - The case of petitioners under Section 15(2) of Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 (for short New Ceiling Act) was admitted for reopening on May 20, 1983. Thereafter the orders dated July 27, 1992, December 24, 1992, February 21, 1994 and January 31, 1995, were respectively passed by Additional Collector (Ceiling) Kota and Board of Revenue Ajmer. The petitioners in the instant writ petition seek to quash the aforesaid orders. 2. After Chapter III-B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (herein after to be referred as Old Ceiling Law) came into force with effect from December 15, 1963 every land holder who was in possession of land in excess of ceiling area had to file a statement. The ancestor of petitioners Kishori Lal filled return on September 30, 1966. The Assistant Collector vide order dated May, 30, 1975 held that there was only 88.84 standard acres of land recorded in the name of Kishore Lal and there were three units. Learned SDO (Prescribed Authority) vide order dated February 19, 1976 held that petitioners are entitled to retain 30.17 standard acres of land. On filing appeal the Board of Revenue vide order dated January 10,1977 remanded the matter because the irrigation intensity of the Chambal Project was not determined. After the remand the Assistant Collector treated the whole land equal to 90.51 standard acres and were not effected by the Ceiling Law. 3. Thereafter the State Government in view of the New Ceiling Act reopened the case of the petitioners vide order dated May 20,1983 and the Additional Collector vide order dated July 27, 1992 held that the petitioners were entitled to retain only 50 standard acres of land and 24.39 standard acres land was declared as surplus. The petitioners assailed this order by filing appeal before the Board of Revenue which was dismissed on December 24, 1992. Two review petitions were also dismissed on February 21,1994 and January 31,1995. Hence the instant writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under Section 15(2) of New Ceiling Act the period of limitation has been prescribed as six years from the date of commencement of the New Ceiling Law. Two review petitions were also dismissed on February 21,1994 and January 31,1995. Hence the instant writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under Section 15(2) of New Ceiling Act the period of limitation has been prescribed as six years from the date of commencement of the New Ceiling Law. Since the case of petitioners was reopened vide order dated May 20,1983 much after the period of six years from January 1,1973 (when the new Act came into force) the order dated May 20, 1983 for reopening the case was beyond limitation. Reliance is placed on Dhanraj v. State of Raj. 1995 RRD 115 . Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supported the impugned judgment. I have reflected over the rival submissions. 5. The Division Bench of this Court in Dhanraj v. State of Rajasthan (supra) indicated thus:- (Para 9) "A perusal of the Amending Act will show that the amendments were made with retrospective effect and it was provided that the provisions shall be deemed to have been incorporated in the Act from the date of commencement of the Amending Act, therefore, the amendment 15 of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 will have to be read as amended, as the amendment is deemed to have been always made. The established cannons interpretation of statute require that plain meaning should be given to the words and phrases occurring in statute and consequently the words within 6 years of the commencement of this Act must necessarily mean commencement of the Ceiling Act 1973 and not the Amending Act so considered. The notice issued on 7th Feb. 1980 is obviously beyond 6 years. The period of 6 years has been expired on 1.1.79, 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. In these three petitions, the notices and proceedings in pursuance thereto are thus illegal and void for total lack of jurisdiction, the same are, therefore, quashed and set aside." 6. The case of petitioners under Section 15(2) of New Ceiling Act was indisputably reopened on May 20,1983 much after the period of six years from January 1, 1973. Thus the proceedings under New Ceiling Act were beyond the period of limitation and deserve to be quashed. 7. The case of petitioners under Section 15(2) of New Ceiling Act was indisputably reopened on May 20,1983 much after the period of six years from January 1, 1973. Thus the proceedings under New Ceiling Act were beyond the period of limitation and deserve to be quashed. 7. Consequently I allow the writ petition and set aside the impugned judgments dated July 27, 1992, December 24, 1992, February 21, 1994 and January 31, 1995 respectively passed by Additional Collector (Ceiling) Kota and Board of Revenue Ajmer. There shall be no order as to costs.Petition Allowed. *******