LAWS(PAT)-1987-9-1

BAIJU PANDA Vs. COMMISSIONER BHAGALPUF DIVISION

Decided On September 25, 1987
BAIJU PANDA Appellant
V/S
COMMISSIONER, BHAGALPUF DIVISION, BHAGALPUR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As both these writ applications involve common question of law and facts, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) By these writ applications, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ for quashing the order dated 4-3-1980 passed by the Additional Collector in Appeal No. 16 of 1974 as contained in Annexure-4 to this writ application and also for quashing the order dated 19-8-1980 and 23-3-1982 passed by the learned Commissioner, Bhagalpur in Munger revision No. 35 of 1980-81 as contained in Annexures 5 and 7 to this writ application.

(3.) The aforesaid respondents passed the aforesaid orders in purported exercise of their power under Section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. For the purpose of disposal of these writ applications, the facts as narrated in C. W. J. C. 2138/82 are being considered. The petitioner allegedly took settlement of 11 dhurs of land in plat No. 196 khata No. 96 situate in village Rangaon Kaprichak, P. S. Tarapur, District Munger. The aforesaid settlement was made by the ex-landlord of the Patna Estate. Pursuant to the said settlement a rent receipt was issued in favour of petitioner on 20-9-1945. According to the petitioner after taking settlement of the land, be constructed a pucca house and has been carrying on business in a portion thereof and was using the rest for the residential purpose on 11-12-1970, D. C. L. R., Munger, (respondent No. 3) issued a notice to show cause upon the petitioner directing him to show cause as to why a proceeding under Section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act shall not be initiated against him. Pursuant to the aforementioned show cause notice the petitioner appeared, filed his show cause and filed documents in support of his case. The petitioner has asserted that after vesting of the zamindaris in the State of Bihar, a return was filed by the ex-land lord and the factum of the settlement made in favour of the petitioner has been mentioned therein and pursuant thereto the petitioner's name was entered into the Register-II maintained by the State of Bihar and since then it had been accepting rent from the petitioner. By an order dated 29-3-1974 as contained in annexure-3 to the writ application the respondent No. 3 in the said proceedings allegedly held that as the land was settled after 1-1-1946 and, therefore, he has jurisdiction to initiate proceeding under Section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act.