JAHANARA KHATUN Vs. REVENUE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Rule is directed against an adjudication made by the Revenue Officer, Saidabad 'b' Camp at Berhampore on 15th April, 1981 in 7a Case No. 239/77 under section 14t (3) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. By the said adjudication the Revenue Officer proceeded on the footing that all the lands in question belonged to Akimannessa Bibi, widow of late Jaayechuddin Biswas of Village Sundalpor,. P. S. Harihar para, District Murshidabadl. The present petitioners appeared in the said 7a Case because at the relevant time the said Akimennessa Bibi was dead. The petitioners through their learned advocate produced a registered deed of Hebanama showing that some time in the year 1931 the disputed lands had been transferred in favour of some of the petitioners and at the relevant time when Chapter IIB. of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act came into force Akimannessa Bibi had no lands exceeding the ceiling. Simply because in the revisional record of rights in respect of the lands in question, the name of Akimannesa Bibi appeared, the Revenue Officer discarded the registered deed of Heabanama and he proceed on the footing that the title remained with akimannessa Bibi. I am afraid the Revenue Officer had no jurisdiction to do that. There may be cases when a document of transfer may not be acted upon by the parties but such adjudication can only be given by a competent civil court or an authority competent to do so. Within the scope and ambit of the powers given to the Revenue Officer for deciding a ceiling under section 14t, the Revenue Officer has no jurisdiction to decide the question of title and as such he cannot hold that a registered deed of transfer which is otherwise valid is inoperative for some reason or other.

(2.) IN the aforesaid circumstances, the impugned order is set. aside. Liberty is, however, given to the respondents to start a fresh proceeding under section 14t against the heirs of Akimannessa Bibi if it transpires that the said Akimannessa Bibi in her personal capacity owned and possessed lands beyond the prescribed ceiling limit at the relevant date excluding the lands covered by said hebanama. The Rule is accordingly disposed of There will be no order as to costs. Rule disposed of.