FESOPH MARAK Vs. DISTRICT COUNCIL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application the short point that falls for consideration is whether the Assam Beard of Revenue can hear appeal from an order passed by the Assistant Revenue Officer, Karbi Anglong District Council. The answer must be in the negative in view of the provisions contained in Section 3 of the Mikir Hills District (Land and Revenue) Act, 1953 (Mikir Hills Act 1 of 1953), for short "the Act", as amended by Act III of 1960 passed by the Mikir Hills District Council. By amendment Act III of 1960, Section 3 was added to "the principal Act" which is extracted.

(2.) THE impugned order dated 4.10.78 was passed by the Assistant Revenue Officer, Danka Circle, Karbi Anglong District Council. On perusal of the Impugned order and scrutiny of Section 3 of "the Act" all hands agree that the appeal should have been preferred to the Chief Executive Member of the Mikir Hills District Council, We have no hesitation to hold that the learned Board of Revenue is justified in reaching the conclusion that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal but not on the reasons set forth in the judgment. We reserve our opinion as to whether the findings of the Board of Revenue that it is incompetent to hear appeals against the order of the District Council, Karbi Anglong in Revenue matter, are correct or not. We express no opinion as to whether the Board of Revenue has jurisdiction to entertain appeal/revision arising out of revenue matters from Karbi Anglong as we are not called upon to answer the same. It will be decided in an appropriate case.

(3.) MR . S.N. Medhi, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner bonafide prosecuted his case before the Board of Revenue and in this Court and a direction may be issued condoning the delay of the period during which the Petitioner prosecuted the appeal before the Board of Revenue and the writ petition before this Court. It is true that the Petitioner bonafide prosecuted the appeal and the writ proceedings, however, it would be entirely for the Chief Executive Member, District Council to exercise "his direction'' to condone the delay, if there be any application to that effect, provided he is competent to condone the delay under any Jaw for the time being in force.