JUDGEMENT Sheema Ali Khan, J. 1. This application has been filed challenging the order dated 14.11.1984 as contained in Annexure-1 passed by the Additional Collector, Nalanda in Land Ceiling Case No.57 of 1975-76, dated 11.12.1985 passed by the Collector, Nalanda in Land Ceiling Appeal No. 1 of 1985 (Annexure-2) and the order dated 21.12.1985 passed by the Additional Member, Board of Revenue in Board Revision Case No. 38 of 1985(Annexure-4). 2. The petitioner is the Mahanth of two Sangats, one situated at Hilsa and the other at Jogipur within the district of Nalanda. The petitioner has been working as Mokamis. 3. The points raised on behalf of the petitioner are firstly that lands in question are Class-IV lands as there is no means of irrigation and the yield is one crop a year; secondly that the petitioner is entitled for exemption under Section 29 of the Ceiling Act or in the alternative, petitioner would be entitled to two units and lastly it is said that the petitioner has not been given an opportunity to exercise his rights under Section 9 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961. 4. From perusal of the orders, this Court finds that the question with respect to the objection raised on behalf of the petitioner under Section 10 (3) of the Act, all three Courts have come to the finding that the petitioners lands are class-Ill lands. This finding is based on Annexure-B which was an enquiry conducted under Section 5 of the Act. In the said enquiry, it has been held that the petitioner is not entitled to exemption under Section 29 of the Act and he is also not entitled to two units because there is only one Sangat which is in operational. The finding of Section 5 has been challenged by filing objections under Section 10(3) of the Act which have been rejected. 5. As far as the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner that he should be given an opportunity to choose the lands which he wishes to retain is concerned, I find that there is some merit in this submission. 5. As far as the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner that he should be given an opportunity to choose the lands which he wishes to retain is concerned, I find that there is some merit in this submission. It is, for example, stated that the petitioner has sold some of the lands before the cut-off date and as such those lands should be exempted from the ceiling proceedings which however, have been included and have been given to the petitioner. It has also been stated that the petitioner has gifted lands situated in different villages to schools, to the State Government and for other social purposes. It is submitted that these lands should be exempted from the proceedings and not being treated as part of the lands allocated to him. 6. In the result, the petitioner may take necessary steps for producing records, documents in accordance with the provisions of Section 9 before the concerned authorities within a period of two months from today. 7. I may clarify, at this stage, that the authorities concerned may call for documents from the concerned schools and other Governmental organizations as they would be having the original documents of gift executed by the petitioner. 8. The application filed under Section 9 of the Act should be disposed of within a period of four months of its filing. 9. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.