JAIRAM SAMANTRAY Vs. BAIKUNTHA SAMANTARAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for the quashing of the decision rendered by the Commissioner of Consolidation, by way of judicial review.

(2.) THE petitioner is the son of original opposite party No. 5, brother of opposite parties 1 and 2 and the paternal uncle of opposit parties 3 and 4. During consolidation operation in village Arakhakud, a question arose as to who should be recorded in respect of the property left behind by Madan, the father of the petitioner and opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 and husband of opposite party No. S. As the name of the petitioner was omitted from the preliminary record, claim was made by him seeking, inclusion of his name as a joint owner with his brothers and nephews; Opposite parties 1 to 4 resisted the claim pleading adoption of the petitioner by Budha, brother of Madan. The Consolidation Officer (O P. No. 6) nagatived the claim of the petitioner sustaining the plea of adoption urged by opposite parties 1 to 4. In Consolidation Appeal No. 86 of. I98O carried by the petitioner, opposite party No. 7 accepted the plea of the petitioner, in revision carried by opposite parties 1 to 4, the Commissioner of Consolidation held that the question being one relating to status, the petitioner should get the same established in a competent Court, the consolidation: authority had no jurisdiction to alter the record prepared at a stage prior to the consolidation operation. He reversed the appellate decision.

(3.) FIRST contention: The learned Corrmissioner relied upon upon certain observations made by this Court in Puni Bewa v. Ananta Sahoo, 47(1979) C. L. T. 494, P. K. Motianty, J. observed in paragraph -7 :