V. Devarajulu Naidu vs The Authorised Officer (Land Reforms) Kancheepuram

Suryamurthy, J.—This is a civil revision petition against the judgment of the Land Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Judge) Chingleput,

dismissing an appeal filed under S.78 of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Lands) Act, 58 of 1961, hereinafter referred to as

the Act, preferred against the order of the Authorised Officer, (Land Reforms). Kancheepuram. The revision petitioner and his wife have two

daughters and three minor sons. One of the minor sons was born on 2nd October 1971. The date of notification contemplated under the Act is

15th February 1970. As the last among the minor sons was born after the date of the notification the said additional extent of five standard acres to

be allotted for every member of the family in excess of five, was not allotted to the family of the petitioner. 15 standard acres were allotted to the

family of the petitioner consisting of five members and for each of the other two members, five acres were allotted. Thus 25 standard acres were

allotted to the family of the petitioner. The petitioner contends that the minor son born after the notified date is also entitled to an extent of 5

standard acres under S.5(1) (b) read with S.10(2)(a) of the Act.

It would appear that proceedings were initiated on 25th August 1973, when the ceiling area in the case of every family was 30 standard acres.

However, those proceedings were not pursued. The Act has been subsequently amended making 15 standard acres as the ceiling area in the case

of every family consisting of five members. After the amendment for the first time these proceedings have been initiated. The contention of the

learned counsel for the revision petitioner is that these proceedings have been taken for the second time, if the proceedings under the unamended

Act are taken into consideration, and therefore, the members of the family who were alive on the date of the preparation of the draft statement

under sub-S.(1) should be taken into account. Admittedly in the instant case, the draft statement was prepared on 8th May 1974. If the

contentions of the learned counsel are correct, then the minor born after 15th February, 1970 also has to be taken into account. However, I am

unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner. S.10(2)(a) of the Act lays down that--

For the purpose of calculating for the first time after the date of commencement of this Act, the ceiling area for a family holding land on the date of

the commencement of this Act in excess of 15 standard acres the authorised officer shall take into account only those members of that family who

are alive on the notified date.

Such proceedings in the instant case treating the ceiling area as 15 standard acres have been initiated for the first time only on 8th May 1974. The

proceedings initiated earlier cannot be relied on by the petitioner to take umbrage under S.10(2)(a). Therefore, the judgment of the Land Tribunal

is confirmed, and the revision petition is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.