JOGENDRA BAG Vs. TAHASILDAR-CUM-REVENUE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The orders passed by the revenue authorities in relation to a ceiling surplus proceeding as per Annexures -2, 3 and 4 are being challenged in this writ application, inter alia, on the ground that the Revenue Officer had no jurisdiction to re -open the determination of ceiling already made on the ground of error in course of the proceeding, inasmuch as the earlier determination made was final and could not have been re -opened.

(2.) IN a ceiling surplus proceeding that had been initiated against the petitioner, the Revenue Officer came to the conclusion vide his order dated 22 -4 -1986 that the land in question could be classified as Class -ll as the village is under the ayacut area of Karanjkot Minor Irrigation Project and the source of water can feed the village during the rains only. On the basis of the aforesaid conclusion, he found that the petitioner does not possess land in excess of the ceiling area. The said order has been annexed as Annexure -1. While scrutinising the payments of water rate in respect of the lands in the village, the Revenue Officer came to learn that a second crop has been raised during 1985.1986, 1987 and 1988 in respect of some plots and the land in question is capable of having two crops and, therefore, the earlier classification made, was incorrect. Accordingly, he issued notice to the petitioner and finally after hearing the petitioner and on holding further enquiry came to hold that the classification earlier made was on an incorrect assumption and if the correct classification is taken into consideration, the land would be class -l and thereby determined ceiling surplus in the hands of the ceiling surplus holder. The order of the Revenue Officer has been annexed as Annexure -2.

(3.) MR . D. P. Sahoo appearing fort the petitioner agrees with vehemence that the power of review contained in Sub -section (1) Section 60 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act cannot tantamount to a power of an appellate authority and, therefore, a decision already made which has become final could not be reviewed on merits. According to him the conclusion of the Revenue Officer on 22 -4 -1986 to the effect that the land can be classified as Class -ll cannot be re -opened.