BHARATRAM Vs. ISHWAR PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have challenged the order passed by the Commissioner, Bilaspur Division on 27/02/1998 (Annexure P/3) whereby while deciding the revision petition preferred by the applicants an order adverse to their interest has been passed directing reversion of land in favour of original holder Ishwar and Samelal, the respondent No. 1 & 2.

(2.) ACCORDING to learned counsel for the petitioners the Commissioner is not empowered to call for fresh report from the Revenue Inspector or consider any new material or evidence while hearing revision petition and decide the matter considering the any such fresh evidence without giving any opportunity to rebut the new evidence/material.

(3.) IN view of the limited nature of jurisdiction available with the revisional authority obtainment of report from Revenue Inspector and acting upon it is not justified and the same has occasioned error of jurisdiction in the impugned order. It further appears that the sale-deeds executed between the parties and the revenue records are probably not available and it is for this reason the appellate authority of Additional Collector directed the Sub Divisional Officer to record statement of parties, inquest witnesses, owners of adjoining land, obtain copies of sale-deeds and thereafter pass fresh order. This order of remand should not have been interfered with by the Commissioner because any order passed without recording evidence of witnesses and obtaining sufficient documents is not in accordance with law and the Additional Collector had rightly remanded the matter to the Sub Divisional Officer for fresh enquiry