DHADI PARIDA Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these applications under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India were heard together as they arise out of the common orders passed by the Consolidation authorities under the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in respect of all the lands which the petitioners claim to have purchased the same by registered sale deeds. They are accordingly disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) SHORN of unnecessary detaifs, the facts of the case are as follows : The disputed property stood recorded in the name of Deity Shri Shri Biswanath Mohadev, Bije Samangola in the district of Jagatsinghpur, which according to the petitioners is a private deity. The Marfatdars, thereafter, transferred them for consideration under some registered sale deeds of the year 1965. During the last settlement operation, the Settlement Authorities recorded the property in favour of the 'Deity Marfat Dhadi Panda' (petitioner No. 1). Before the settlement operation was finalised, the consolidation operation came into force in the locality by virtue of Notification dated 15.7.1978 which was published under Section 3(1) of the Act.

(3.) ON 7.1.1986 the Consolidation Officer, after hearing the objection f.rom the parties including opposite parties 5 to 8, disposed of the objection cases of both the parties under Annexure 7 with a direction to record the land in the name of opposite parties 5 to 8 as Trustees of the Deity. Thereafter, the petitioners preferred four consolidation appeals to the'Deputy Director of Consolidation which were registered as Appeal Case Nos. 23 to 26 of 1986. The Deputy Director, opposite party No. 3, after hearing the parties dismissed ail the appeals on 29.3.1986 vide Annexure 8. Thereafter the petitioners preferred consolidation revisions to the Commissioner of Consolidation, opposite party No. 1 which were registered as Consolidation Revision Nos. .880 to 883 of 1986. After giving opportunity of hearing to the parties, on 13.3.1992 the Consolidation Commissioner passed an order dismissing all the revisions by a common order under Annexure 9. Against that order the petitioners have preferred these writ applications, (All the Annexures referred to above relate to OJC 3385 of 1992).