VIJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI R. K. Dixit, counsel for the petitioner. Heard counsel on the question of admission.

(2.) ANNEXURE P-4 is the order of the Board of Revenue which is impugned in this Court on several grounds. However, we are satisfied that the preliminary objection of the petitioner against the order passed in appeal holding the appeal to be not maintainable has much merit and accordingly it is not necessary for us to deal with other contentions raised in this case.

(3.) THE Board of Revenue has taken the view that the order impugned in appeal was not an order passed by the Competent Authority under Section 4 (1) of the M. P. Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960, for short the Act. In our view jurisdictional facts have not been correctly appreciated by the Board and in rendering the decision the Board has also misconceived the ambit and scope of the provision. Accordingly, we quote Section 4 (1) : -