PARIKHIT MEHER Vs. MANA SINGH DHARUA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution is against the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer (opposite party No. 2) made under Section 23 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act. Petitioner has applied to quash the said order as affirmed in appeal by the Additional District Magistrate and in revision by the Revenue Divisional Commissioner (opposite parties 3 and 4 respectively) by issue of a writ of certiorari.

(2.) Petitioner is a money-lender. In a proceeding under Section 17 of the Orissa Money-Lenders Act petitioner admitted that he was a transferee of certain lands belonging to opposite party No. 1 under two deeds, one of 1968 and the other of 1973. In view of the fact that the petitioner was not a member of the Scheduled Tribes while the opposite party No. 1 was a member of the Scheduled Tribes and no permission had been taken as provided under the Orissa Land Reforms Act for such alienation, a proceeding under Section 23 of the Act was initiated against the petitioner. The S.D.O. by his order dated 25-10-1976 directed restoration of possession of the property and imposed penalty of Rs. 200/- per acre per each year for the period during which petitioner was in possession of the property. In appeal and revision, petitioner failed to obtain any relief.

(3.) Two reliefs were claimed in the writ application, (i) the direction for restoration of possession should be quashed and (ii) the imposition of penalty should be set aside. On 17-7-1981, the following order was recorded by a Bench of this Court:-