SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH AND ORS. versus THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

Citation: [2008] 2 S.C.R. 281 · Decided: 01-02-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

~ 
[2008] 2 S.C.R. 281 
-~~ 
SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH AND ORS. 
A 
II. 
THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 1263 of 2001) 
. 
FEBRUARY 1, 2008 
8 
• t 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ.] 
Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and 
~\ 
Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 - s.10(3), 32A -
Preparation of Draft publication - Consideration of objections c, 
by authorities - However, final publication not made -
Amendment introduced by 1982 Act - Repetition ~f draft 
statement prepared earlier - Objections to draft publication -
Held: Can be taken within stipulated time and authorities 
required to consider them by virtue of sub-section (3) of s.10-
D 
There is also provision for adducing evidence - Therefore, 
~. 
contention that person who wants to prefer objection is 
deprived of adequate opportunity is without substance - Blhar 
Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of 
Surplus Land) Amendment Act, 1982. 
E 
Proceedings were initiated under the Bihar Land 
Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of 
Surplus Land) Act, 1961 against the landholder family of 
: .-A. 
'B'. 'K' was daughter-in-law and 'BO' was grand daughter 
of '8'. In the said Land Ceiling case, after draft publication 
and on consideration of the objection made by '8', orders F 
were passed by competent authority against which the 
aforesaid persons filed revision application. Revisional 
authority accepted some of the obj~ctions of '8' and 
rejected others. However, as final publication was not 
G 
-~ 
made, after the amendment of the Act by Bihar Land 
Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of 
Surplus Land) Amendment Act, 1982, the matter was taken 
afresh from the stage of s.10 of the Act. At the stage of 
fresh proceedings, objections were raised regarding the 
281 
H 
282 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 2 S.C.R. 
A · classification of lands and exclusion of lands gifted to 
daughter-in-law, grand daughter and to daughters within 
the grace period. The competent authority accepted part 
of the objections and ordered for exclusion of the land 
gifts during grace period in favour of two daughters and 
B rejected the objection relating to the classification of land." 
On appeal, appellate authority accepted part of the 
objection. Certain lands which were earlier classified as 
Class-I land were held not properly to have been done. 
However, the other part of the classification was held to 
c be valid. The gift made in favour of the two daughters was 
confirmed but the claim relating to deletion of I.and gifted 
in favour of daughter-in-law and grand daughter was 
rejected. The revision thereagainst was dismissed .. The 
writ petition was dismissed. In the writ appeal, the stand 
0 taken was that the effect of the amended provisions i.e. 
ss.32A and 328 had not been kept in view; that there was 
no de novo enquiry and that having been not done, the 
judgment of the Single Judge was unsustainable. The 
Division Bench did not find any substance in the plea and 
E with reference to s.10 of the Act, dismissed the writ appeal. 
In appeal to this court, appellant contended that the 
true effect of the amendment has not been kept in view. If 
the draft statement was repeated there was not need for 
·inserting ss. 32A .and 328 and that there was need for 
F enquiry and the procedures contemplated under ss.6, 8 
and 9 were to be adopted. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : A bare reading of s.32-A of Bihar Land 
G Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of 
Surplus Land) Act, 1961 shows that where an appeal, 
revision, review or reference other than those arising out 
of order passed under s.8 or sub-section (3) of s.16 is 
pending before any authority on the date of 
commencement of the Act, the same shall abate. The 
H 
[ 
r 
I 
-f 
,,,t 
.,,. . 
_.._ 
~, 
SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH AND ORS. v. THE STATE 
OF BIHAR AND ORS. [PASAYAT, J.] 
283' 
proviso is of significance. It stipulates that the Collector 
. shall proceed with the case afresh in accordance with 
provisions of s.10. Sub-section (1) of s.1 O deals with 
preparation of draft statement. Sub-section (3) is of 
considerable importance. It provides that when there is 
any objection to the draft statement in respect of the 
matters specified in clause (a), (b), (c) and (d) of sub-
section (1) received within 30 days of the publication of 
the draft statement or service thereof under sub-section 
(2), whichever is latter, when prefer

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.