Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1812 (PAT)

Fazle Iqubal Son of Shamsuddin v. State Of Bihar

2018-12-11

A.P.SAHI, CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH, SUDHIR SINGH

body2018
JUDGMENT : Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J. Heard Shri S. Raza Ahmad, AAG. 5 for the State of Bihar. There is no one present on behalf of the petitioners. 2. The reference made to this Bench for being answered is incorporated in the order dated 10th July, 1995 i.e. extracted here-in-under:- "While admitting this application, a Division Bench of this Court having doubted correctness of law laid down by Special Bench of this Court in the case of the State of Bihar Vs. Sri K. M. Zuberi and others, reported in, (1986) PLJR 67, directed that this case shall be placed for hearing before a larger Bench and therefore, this application has been placed before us. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties informed us that against the aforesaid judgment of Special Bench, an application for grant of special leave to appeal was filed and pursuant to grant of leave civil appeal is pending before the Supreme Court which is likely to be taken up for hearing any date. It has also been stated that while granting special leave application, the apex court stayed operation of judgment delivered by Special Bench. Learned counsel appearing for the State is directed to make enquiry from the State counsel appearing in the Supreme Court as to what is the position of the aforesaid appeal and within what time the same is likely to be disposed of. On the next date copy of stay order should be filed. Let this case be placed under the heading "to be mentioned" before us on 21.8.1995 in Chambers at 2.15 P.M." 3. A perusal of the said order indicates that the correctness of the law laid down by a Special Bench in the case of State of Bihar Vs. Sri K.M. Zuberi and others, reported in, (1986) PLJR 67 was doubted and accordingly the matter was referred to be heard by a larger Bench. 4. While noticing the said judgment it was also indicated therein that a Special Leave to Appeal is pending before the Supreme Court against the said judgment and, therefore, since the appeal was likely to be disposed of later on, the matter was adjourned. Accordingly, the Full Bench so constituted earlier vide order dated 23rd August, 1995 directed that the case may be placed for hearing after the disposal of the Civil Appeal pending before the Apex Court. 5. Accordingly, the Full Bench so constituted earlier vide order dated 23rd August, 1995 directed that the case may be placed for hearing after the disposal of the Civil Appeal pending before the Apex Court. 5. The learned Additional Advocate General has invited the attention of the Court to the judgment of the Apex Court in the same case reported in (State of Bihar Vs. Shri K.M. Zuberi and Ors, (1996) 9 SCC 171 ). After having considered the various provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area & Acquisition of Surplus Land ) Act, 1961 as well as the amendments thereafter the Apex Court held that the word 'family' as occurring in Section 2 (ee) of the Ceiling Act would prevail and consequently it was ruled that while determining the ceiling area in the hands of a land-holder whether governed by Mitakshara Law or governed by Mohammedan Law no additional unit is given to an adult son of the land-holder and, therefore, the earlier view expressed by this Court in the case of Imamul Hasan Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar, 1982 BBCJ 208 lays down the law correctly. 6. In view of the said pronouncement of the Apex Court, no further deliberations are necessary and the reference stands answered accordingly. 7. Let the writ petition be now placed before the appropriate Bench for its disposal.