CWJC No. 4829 of 2002. Case: Mohammad Kajimuddin and Ors. Vs State of Bihar and Ors., [Alongwith CWJC No. 4848 of 2002]. High Court of Patna (India)
| Case Number | CWJC No. 4829 of 2002 |
| Judges | Aftab Alam, J. |
| Issue | Civil |
| Citation | 2005 (4) PLJR 718 |
| Judgement Date | September 14, 2005 |
| Court | High Court of Patna (India) |
Order:
Aftab Alam, J.
-
Heard Ms. Pallavi Mishra, counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Abbas Haider representing the private respondents. Mr. Dinu Kumar, Standing Counsel (Ceiling) is also present. In C.W.J.C. No. 4829 of 2002, there are nine petitioners and in C.W.J.C. No. 4848 of 2002, there are two petitioners. All the eleven petitioners in these two cases are purchasers of certain pieces of land from one Ainul Haque (now deceased) who was impleaded as respondent No. 5 and after whose death, his heirs and legal representatives have been substituted in his place. The details of the lands purchased by the nine petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 4829 of 2002 is given in Annexure 2 to that writ petition and the details of the lands purchased by the two petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 4848 of 2002 is given in paragraphs 10, 11 and 12 of that writ petition.
-
All the petitioners are aggrieved by an order passed by the Collector by which the lands purchased by the petitioners have been taken out from the lands falling in the unit allowed to the vendor and have been made part of the surplus land in his hands and consequently acquired by the State Government. The petitioners also challenge the notification issued under Section 15(1) of the Land Ceiling Act, issued in consequence of the Collector's order and published in the District Gazette, Araria dated 30.7.2002 insofar as it includes the pieces of land purchased by them from the landholder.
-
The facts of the case are brief and without any controversy. A land ceiling case bearing No. 162 of 1973-74 was held against Ainul Haque (the vendor of the petitioners) originally impleaded as respondent No. 5 in the two writ petitions. By an order passed by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms on 30.7.1986 in that proceeding, the landholder Ainul Haque was allowed one unit for himself and 1/10 unit for his minor son(s). On the basis of the unit assigned to him, he was allowed to hold 33 acres of land and the remaining approximately 32 acres in area was declared surplus. On the basis of the order of the Deputy Collector Land Reforms dated 30.7.1986, a notification under Section 11(1) of the Act was also issued on 24.12.1987. In the notification under Section 11(1) of the Act, the lands sold by him (i.e. those claimed by the petitioners) were made part of the 33 acres of land left in his possession and those were not made part of the 32 acres of land declared as surplus.
-
The landholder Ainul Haque apparently did...
To continue reading
Request your trial