JAGDISH THAKUR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD.

(2.) THE present application is against the orders passed by the original authority and the appellate authority in a proceeding purporting to be a proceeding under Section 48D of the Bihar Tenancy Act.

(3.) IN respect of notice, I have already dealt above to show that it is bogus and fraudulent. So far as service of notice is concerned, it is equally bogus and fraudulent for the simple reason that it is invalid, undated and mentioned that the petitioner not being there, other refused to take the notice. To my mind an officer conducting any proceeding, the service of notice ought to have been rejected outright. The things were controverted otherwise. It was kept on record.