PREMANANDA DAS Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions by the sa me Petitioner are directed against the order of the Member, Board of Revenue, Orissa, Cuttack, in suo motu proceedings under Section 38 -B of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, the proceedings having been initiated on the basis of the statement of facts submitted by the Collector. As common questions of fact and law are involved, they were beard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THE Petitioner claiming to be a tenant under the ex -intermediary and to be in possession of the land in question on the date of vesting approached the Collector under the Orissa Estates Abolition Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for being recognised as a tenant under the State and the Estate Abolition Collector in fact settled the land in question with him by order dated 1 -10 -1982 in exercise of his powers under Section 8(1) of the Act. On receipt of a report from the Collector with regard to the illegalities committed by the Estate Abolition Collector in settling the land with the Petitioners the. Member, Board of Revenue, in purported exercise of his power under Section 38 -B of the Act issued notice to the Petitioner to show cause as to why the said order of the Estate Abolition Collector would not be annulled. The Petitioner did not his show cause pursuant to the said notice and thereafter the Member, Board of Revenue, by the impugned order dated 28th of March, 1984 (Annexure -3 in each of the writ applications) has set aside the order of the Estate Abolition Collector dated 1 -10 -1982. The Petitioner has approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with the prayer that the order of the Member, Board of Revenue, be cancelled.

(3.) FOR proper appreciation of the points urged Section 38 -B of the Act is extracted here under in extenso: