ASHA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 15.04.1997 passed in Batai Case No. 4 of 1986-87/Batai Case No. 1 of 1989-90 by the Sub Divisional Officer, Hajipur, as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition, whereby the batai claim raised on behalf of the petitioners or their ancestors under Sec. 48E of the Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885 (in short, "the B.T. Act") has been rejected by recording a finding of fact that dispute between the parties are essentially of title and, therefore, for redressal of their grievances, they should approach the competent civil court. The petitioners are also aggrieved by the order dated 17.09.2004/11.10.2004 passed by the respondent District Collector, Vaishali in Revenue Case No. 17 of 1997-98, as contained in Annexure-2 to this writ petition, whereby the aforesaid case filed on behalf of the petitioners or their ancestors purportedly under Sec. 48F of the B.T. Act has been dismissed by recording a finding of fact that the dispute is completely of title between the parties, which can be decided by the competent civil court and not by revenue authorities.

(2.) Though, despite repeated calls, none appears on behalf of the petitioners, yet I have heard the learned AC to GP 13, appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 3.

(3.) The learned State counsel after going through the record has submitted that the original authority as also the appellate authority have rejected the batai claim of the petitioners or their ancestors by recording concurrent findings of fact that dispute between the parties are that of title and there is no bona fide batai dispute between the parties requiring adjudication under Sec. 48E of the B.T. Act According to him, the impugned orders cannot be legally faulted.