MOTAHARA BIBI ALIAS KHATUN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition is directed against initiation of a suo moto proceedings under section 44 (2a) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act for revising the finally published Revisional Record of Rights relating to Khatian No. 405 of Mouza Barum within P. S. Beldanga, District Muslimabad. For the initiation of the said proceeding, a notice under Section 57 read with Section 44 (2a) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act was issued to the petitioner and with the said notice a copy of the order sheet of the proceeding was also served. As the order sheet containing the reasons for initiating the said suo motu proceeding has been served upon the petitioner, it is to be seen as to whether from the order sheet a case for initiation of a suo motu proceeding is prima facie made out or not.

(2.) MRS. Maitra, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended in the first place that when after completion of the stages for preparation of the draft record of rights, a finally published Revisional record of rights was prepared under section 44 (2), there was no occasion to start any suo motu proceeding under section 44 (2a ). She submitted that a draft record was prepared under Section 44 (1) and ultimately on the basis of the said Draft Record of Right, the finally published Revisional Record of Rights under Section 44 (2) was prepared. If the State Government or the Revenue Authorities were aggrieved by any adjudication made under Section 44 (1) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act leading to final preparation. of the record of rights, the State Government could have challenged the adjudication under Section 44 (1) in the appropriate proceeding but not having done so, the Revenue Officer was not. empowered to challenge the correctness of the said record of rights in a proceeding under section 44 (2a) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act. For the said contention, Mrs. Maitra referred to a decision of this Court made in the case of Biswanath Mandal vs. State of West Bengal reported in 78 C. W. N. at page 277. Amaresh Roy, J. held in the said decision that a record of rights was finally published after an objection 'had been considered and disposed of under Section 44 (1) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1963. No appeal was preferred against the decision of the Revenue Officer but after the final publication of the record of rights, a suo motu proceeding under Section 44 (2a) was initiated and in 'the aforesaid circumstances, it was held by His Lordship that the Officer had no jurisdiction to initiate the, proceeding under Section 44 (2a) suo motu. It has not been stated in the instant writ petition that any objection was filed against the draft record of rights under section 44 (1) of the west Bengal Estates Acquisition Act and such objection was disposed of in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the facts concerning the decision made in the case of Biswanath Mondal are clearly distinguishable.

(3.) MRS. Maitra, however, contended that whenever a record of rights is finally made and finally published, it must be presumed that different stages for the preparation of the Record of Rights were gone into including the stage for deciding any objection to be made under Section 44 (1 ). Accordingly, whenever a Record of Rights is finally prepared and published there is no occasion for the Revenue Officer to start any suo motu proceeding. I am, however, unable to accept the said contention of Mrs. 'maitra. Section 44 (2a) has been placed after Section 44 (2) and it has been enacted for the specific purpose of revising the record of rights finally framed and finally published under Section 44 (2) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act. If it is held that once the record of rights is finally published comprising various stages of the preparation of the record of rights no further revision, suo moto or otherwise, under section 44 (2a) is permissible, then the very section 44 (2a) becomes nugatory and in my view the specific purpose of Section 44 (2a) is to enable the Revenue authorities to revise the finally published record of rights on the basis of either an objection made by a party within a specified time or suo moto by the Revenue authorities also within the specified time under the said provisions of Section 44 (2a ). It is true that a suo moto power to revise finally published record of rights should be exercised with all care and caution and the Revenue authorities should not be permitted to initiate a suo motu proceeding arbitrarily and/or for making a roving enquiry but from the order sheet of the proceeding in question, it appears that the Revenue Authority was prima facie of the view that the petitioner in whose name the finally published record of rights stands is not a legal heir of Hazi Sr. Sarafuddin. Such record of rights was prepared without any valid instrument of transfer or evidence. Mrs. Maitra very strongly contended that the Revenue Officer was not a Civil Court and he was not competent to decide the question of title in preparing and/or revising the record of rights. The record of rights according to Mrs. Maitra is a document showing the possession of the person recorded in respect of the land in question having only a forward presumption. For the said contention, Mrs. Maitra referred to a decision of this Court made in the case of Bra/a Mohan Sarkar vs. State of West Bengal reported in 79 C. W. N. at page 1033. It was held by B. C. Roy, J. in the said decision that in a proceeding under section 44- (2a) of the Estates Acquisition Act, 1953,the only question to be decided is whether the person in whose name the land is recorded was in possession at the date of vesting and in deciding that question the. Revenue Officer can incidentally go into the question of title, the basis of such possession but it is not within his jurisdiction to decide 'the question of title or the validity of a particular document directly in such proceeding. The Revenue Officer is also, not entitled to go into the question of the motive behind a particular document.