MANAS RANJAN DAS Vs. CONSOLIDATION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MESSRS Modern Fabricators and Smt. Arati Mohanty who are two of the opposite parties in these writ petitions, filed an application (vide R.C.No. KR 114 of 1995) Under Section 37(1) of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (in short, 'the Act') before the Commissioner, Consolidation, Orissa, Bhubaneswar. By a speaking order dated 18.10.1996 the Commissioner has admitted the said revision for hearing on merits. The writ petitioners, who are arrayed as opposite parties in the said revision, have filed these three writ petitions challenging the aforesaid order. According to the petitioners, the Commissioner erred in exercise of his jurisdiction in admitting the revision and he ought to have rejected it at the threshold.

(2.) IN order to appreciate the contention of the counsel for parties, it is necessary to refer to the previous litigation between the parties which came to be decided in the common judgment of this Court in M/s. Modern Fabricators, Rajendra Harichandan and Kailash Narayan Singh Deo v. Rajendra Harichandan and Consolidation Officer, Pipili, 73 (1992) CLT 217.

(3.) SINCE the order of the Commissioner in admitting the revision for hearing on merits is assailed in this writ petition, we may refer to Sections 36 and 37 of the Act. Sub -section (1) of Section 36 of the Act provides that if a person feels aggrieved by any decision of the Director of Consolidation, he may file a revision within the time stipulated therein against such decision before the Consolidation Commissioner who may revise it after giving the parties concerned reasonable opportunity of being heard. For this purpose, the Commissioner is competent to call for and examine the records. Section 37 of the Act with which we are concerned, reads as follows :