LAKSHMAN MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition involves an interesting question of law with regard to the provisions of Sections 10(2), 10-A and 12(2) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) The facts of the case lie in a very narrow compass.

(3.) R. S. Plot No. 1629 and R. S. Plot No. 1639 have been carved out of O. S. Plot No. 1221 and was originally recorded in the name of Karu Mahto grandfather of the petitioner. According to the petitioner Karu Mahto died leaving behind his only son Sanichar Mahto. After the death of Karu Mahto, the said Sanichar Mahto had been in actual and cultivatory possession of the land in question as also the said Sanichar Mahto had been paying rent in respect of the land in question even after the coming into force of the Act. According to the petitioner the said lands were devided into two parts for convenience of cultivation.