COLLECTOR Vs. PARAMESWAR NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is on a motion of the Collector, Kalahandi, under Section 59(2) of the Orissa Land Reforms Act.

(2.) IN Case No. 705 of 1976 the Revenue Officer, Nawapara, determined the ceiling area of Parameswar Naik. In so doing he accepted the contention of the land holder that his son Kulamani Naik had separated from the "family" since 1969 and that the lands had been partitioned with 52.98 acres to the share of Kulamani and the balance of 6093 acres to the share of Parameswar. He also accepted the plea that three plots aggregating to Order 72 acres did not belong to Parameswar but to a Teva Devi.

(3.) IN the hearing before the Board of Revenue certain preliminary objections have been raised. It has been argued that the draft statement published under Sub -section (3) of Section 44, becomes final and conclusive on expiry of the prescribed period and it cannot be revised thereafter even by the Board of Revenue. It has also been argued that whatever power the revisional authority mayor may not have it has not the power to review the evidence unless the statute expressly confers such power. The revisional authority cannot therefore travel beyond the order passed or proceedings recorded by the inferior authority and make a fresh enquiry into the fact of partition. It must confine itself to the legality or propriety of the finding of the Revenue Officer in this regard. In support of this view Mr. D.P. Sahoo has cited the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case at State of Kerala v. K.M.O. Abdulla and Co. : A.I.R. 1965 S.C. 1585. It is further argued that the enquiry contemplated in Section 43(2) of the Orissa Land Reforms Act is one within the discretion of the Revenue Officer and the revisional authority cannot interfere with that discretion and order an enquiry to be made.