LAL MUNI DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application prayer is for quashing of the order dated 30-4-85 passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation, Bihar, Patna, purporting to be in exercise of the revisional power under Section 35 of the Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in Consolidation Revision No. 1652/81 a true copy whereof has been annexed as annexure-1 as also the order dated 29-6-81 passed by the Dy. Director of Consolidation, Rohtas in Consolidation appeal case No. 267 of 1978-79, a true copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure-2, which has been affirmed in the aforesaid revision and further prayer is for confirming the order dated 16-11-78 passed by the Consolidation Officer, Kargahar in Consolidation Case No. 117/78-79, a true copy whereof has been annexed as annexure-3.

(2.) In short, the relevant facts are that the dispute relates to land appertaining to survey khata Nos. 49,122 and 123 equivalent to R.S. Khata No. 172. comprising an area of 7.24 acres. The case of the petitioners is that one Rupkalia, was married to Thakur Mahtc who died leaving no issue. After the death of said Thakur Mahto Rupkalia married Mahadeo Mahto and the original petitioner Sheobachan Mahto alias Sheobachan Singh is born from them. The cadestral khata was prepared in the name of Mostt. Rupkalia. A true copy of the C.S. Khata with respect to the disputed land has been annexed as annexure-4. However, revisional survey khata was prepared in the joint names of Sheobachan Singh and Daulatia, mother of respondent Nos. 5 to 8. The petitioner filed case under Section 106 of the Bihar Tenancy Act against the said survey entries, which was decided against him. The petitioner preferred Revision appeal No. 12 of 1975 before the court of Second Subordinate Judge Arrah against the aforesaid decision. In the meantime, Consolidation scheme was initiated in the area by issuing notification under Section 3 of the Act. The petitioner claims to have filed an objection, which was registered as Consolidation case No. 103/78-79, which was decided in favour of Sheobachan vide order dated 16-11-68, wherein the Consolidation Officer, Kargahar (respondent No. 4) held that the mother of respondent Nos. 5 to 8 was not in possession of the disputed land and hence, he directed for deletion of the name of respondent Nos. 5 to 8 from the possession of land and further directed that the name of Sheobachan be recorded and Chak be prepared in his name. The mother of respondent Nos. 5 to 8 filed appeal before the Dy. Director Consolidation, Rohtas against the said order of the Consolidation Officer, Kargahar which was registered as appeal No. 267/78-79. The Dy. Director, Rohtas, vide impugned order dated 29-6-81 set aside the order of the Consolidation Officer, Kargahar and allowed the appeal.

(3.) The original petitioner Sheobachan preferred a revision in the Court of Director of Consolidation, Bihar against the said order dated 29-6-91, which was numbered as Revision Case No. 1562/81. The said revision was finally dismissed vide the impugned order dated 30-4-85 and he affirmed the order of the appellate authority.