SANGAROO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A revision application has been filed against the order dated 17-10-1998 pressed by the SDO. It has been alleged that while cancelling the 'Asami' Patta of the revisionist, he was not given any opportunity of being heard. A perusal of the order of the SDO records that it is a summary order passed by him without giving the lease holders an opportunity to present their case. It is also not clear from the file whether the tenure for which the 'Pattas' were allotted was over or not.

(2.) THE case is therefore sent beck to the SDO with the direction to first ascertain whether the period for which 'Pattas' was alloted was over or not. If the period was over, then all the rights or allottees would have ceased and there was no need to hear him. The 'cancellation' would actually not be required as mere correction of land records would serve the purpose. However, if either the tenures was not mentioned or some tenure was left, the revisionist should be heard and speaking order passed.