NAKUL MAHTO Vs. CHHUTA MONJHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the orders as contained, in Annexures 4, 5 and 6 are under challenge which were passed by respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 respectively. The said respondents passed the aforementioned orders in purported exercise of the powers conferred upon them under Section 71 -A of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act whereby and where under it was directed that the lands in question be restored in favour of respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) For the purpose of disposal of this writ petition, it is necessary to state the facts at all as Mr. P. K. Prasad has raised a pure question of law. He submitted that, from a perusal of the order of the Executive Magistrate as contained in Annexure -4 to the writ petition, it would appear that a contentious question was raised, namely, as to whether respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are members of the Scheduled Tribe or not inasmuch as they are Manjhi by caste and the caste Manjhi has not been mentioned as member of the scheduled tribe in the Constitution Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950.

(3.) While an appeal was preferred, from the aforementioned order the appellate court merely found that Manjhi and Bedias are of same caste and the customs of Manjhi and Bedias are the same in the district. The revisional court merely quoted the order of the appellate court which is reproduced hereinbelow :