SHEONATH SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. This writ application arises out of a proceeding under Section 48E of the Bihar Tenancy Act 1885 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The four petitioners have joined this writ petition seeking to challenge the appellate order dated 21.11.2000 (Annexure 2), passed by the learned Additional Collector, East Champaran, in Bataidari Appeal No. 3/98-99 Anutha Sahni v. Anadi Nath Dev, whereby he has dismissed the appeal preferred by the bataidar (the present petitioners) in purported exercise of the appellate power conferred on him under Section 48F of the Act. The learned appellate authority upheld the order dated 16.11.1998 (Annexure 1), passed by the learned Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Raxaul, in Bataidari Case No. 486/98 and 484/98, whereby the application of the present petitioners under Section 48E(i) of the Act for declaration of their bataidari rights with respect to the land In question and for protection of unlawful ejectment from their tenancy, was rejected.

(2.) ACCORDING to the writ petition, Petitioner No. 1 (Sheonath Sah) filed Batadari Case No. 486/98 with respect to land bearing plot No. 487, covering an area of 2 katha 16 dhurs, khata No. 72; pilot No. 489, covering an area of 7 kathas 5 dhurs, khata No. 72, plot No. 485, covering an area of 1 katha 1 dhur, and plot No. 541 covering an area of 3 katha, 1 dhurs and in all a total area of land covering 19 kathas and 3 dhurs. Petitioner No. 2 (Motilal Sah) filed Bataidari Case No. 484/98 with respect to plot No. 474, covering an area of 3 katha 4 dhurs, khata No. 72 and plot No. 482, covering an area of 3 katha 14 dhurs and plot No. 483, covering an area of 2 katha 6 dhurs, and Khata No. 15, plot No. 377 covering an area of 9 katha 8dhur, plot No. 379 covering an area of 5 katha, the total being 1 bigha, 3 katha 12 dhurs. All the lands are situate in village Lakshmipur, PS Adapur, District East Champaran. Both the applications along with similar applications were rejected by order dated 16.11.98 (Annexure 1), passed by learned LRDC, Raxaul. The present petitioners preferred statutory appeal in terms of Section 48F of the Act which has been rejected by the impugned order.

(3.) LEARNED Standing Counsel has supported the impugned action. He submits that the learned first authority is entitled to determine a prima facie case for reference to the Board in terms of Section 48E(iii) of the Act for promoting the settlement of disputes between the landlord and under-raiyat. He relies on the judgment reported in 1999 (2) PLJR 167 Parmanand Oraon v. State of Bihar.