9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (3) TMI 109X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 973. It was also pointed out before the Asstt. Contrl. that the accountable person had filed an appeal against this order and a writ in this regard is pending before the Hon'ble High Court. The Hon'ble High Court has directed that for the possession of the land declared as surplus should not be given to the Govt, till the disposal of the matter by the High Court. The Asstt. Contrl. also found that the land was still in the possession of the accountable person. The Asstt. Controller further noted that the lady had received this land on partition in 1969 and he therefore held that the lady was owner of this land on the date of death. In this connection the also referred to the assessment made to wealth tax where the value of the agricultural land had also been included. The Asstt. Contrl. then proceeded to value the land and he valued the irrigated land of 55 bighas a Rs. 1200 per bighas and the unirrigated land of 309 bighas was valued at 600 per bighas. 3. Before the Appl. CED, it was submitted that the Asstt. Contrl, had wrongly included the value of all the land in the name of the deceased in view of the ceiling order determining the extent of surplus lands in her hands. The v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time of death. According to him, any acquisition after the death would not change the position. The Appl. Contrl. therefore upheld the inclusion of agricultural land in the estate of the deceased. He however reduced the valuation of such land from Rs. 2,51,760 taken by the Asstt. Contrl. to Rs. 2,09,800. 5. The ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted before us that the lower authorities have not property appreciated the legal position regarding the agricultural lands owned by the assessee. He pointed out that on the date of death which was on 8th Oct., 1976, there was already an order of the SDM by which a part of the land had been held to be surplus. He pointed out that this judgment was no doubt the subject matter of writ before the High Court. In this writ petition it was submitted that the old law under the Raj. Tnancy (Fixation of Ceiling of Land) Govt. Rules, 1963 and the Tenancy Law had been repealed by the promulgation of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling of Agricultural Holdings Act, 1963. It was contended that as a result of this repeal, the new Act alone survived and all the cases ought ot have been decided under the new Act and not under the old Act or old law. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tus shall be governed by the provisions of cls. (c)s and (e) of s. 6 of the General clauses Act. The contention that if the right created in favour of the State by the statute under s. 30E (1)(a) without a right which really vested in the State even then such a right cannot be taken away by a subsequent legislation and on the basis of such inchoate right the State could claim protection under s. 6(C) and (e) of the General Clauses Act, however cannot be accepted." The Court further held as under: "It is true that on the date when the declaration was to be filed by the land holder under s 9 of the old rules, it could not in all cases be said what exact area of the land shall ultimately be surrendered as a surplus land by the land holder to the State but it hardly makes any difference and has little relevance to determine the question whether the rights created in favour of the State under s. 30E of the old law were rights accrued or vested right. The procedure to finally determine the quantum of the surplus area is given in the statute and the rules made there under but this procedure hardly affects the rights created in favour of the State. As soon as the exact amount of surp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on as the basis of valuation on the date of death. 9. We have considered the facts of the case and we are of the view that the agricultural land belonging to the assessee could not be valued as on the date of death without having regard to the ceiling law applicable and the order of ceiling law passed in this case. The order of the SDM has already been passed several months before the death of the deceased. Though this order had been stayed and a writ regarding that was still pending, it is clear that certain proceedings under the ceiling law had been initiated and the initial order had been passed. The position of the cases initiated under the old law has already been determined by the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court and they have held that the proceedings would continue to be governed by the old provisions. At this stage, it may not be possible to know the final outcome of the assessee's writ petition. However, it is clear from the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court that the rights of the State and liability of the land hold under the statute shall be governed by the provisions of law in view of s 6 of the General Ckayses Act. It is also clear that whenever the right of the Sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
