SIBA MAHAKUR Vs. MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner filed the instant writ petition invoking writ jurisdiction under Article(s) 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 assailing the correctness of the impugned order (Annexure-1) dtd. 17/8/2009 passed in OEA Revision Case No.67 of 1984 under Sec. 38-B of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'OEA Act') whereby settlement of the schedule lands by the Tahasildar, Sonepur (OP No.3) was set aside with a direction to correct the record of rights in favour of the deity, namely, OP No.6 without providing any opportunity of hearing to him and therefore, it is not sustainable in law and thus, liable to be interfered with.

(2.) Pursuant to the above direction under Annexure-1, OP No.3 passed order dtd. 19/9/2009 (Annexure-2) and accordingly, corrected the RORs in favour of OP No.6 deleting the names of the Petitioner and others therefrom. As per the Petitioner, OP No.1, who passed the order (Annexure-1) under challenge, fell into serious error to hold that the Petitioner and others do not have any rights vis---vis the schedule lands without properly appreciating the relevant facts on record. Thus, according to the Petitioner, the record of rights have been corrected erroneously by the order under Annexure-1 and that too without offering opportunity of hearing to him, which, therefore, deserves to be set aside.

(3.) Heard Mr. S. Sourav, learned counsel for the Petitioner; Mr. D.K. Mohanty, learned AGA and Mr. S.P. Mohanty, learned counsel for OPs.