DUDHESHWAR GIRL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have challenged the revisional Order dated 10th September, 1987, passed in Revision Case No. 1911/85, whereby and wh6re -under the revision application preferred by the Respondent No. 5 was allowed giving declaration of right and title in his favour.

(2.) THE dispute relates to right, title, and possession over the land appertaining to R.S. Khata Nos. 43 and 44 corresponds to old C.S. Khata Nos. 44, 45, 46 and 49 situated in mouza -Makuria, Thana No. 59, Rajpur Anchal in the district of Bhojpur.

(3.) Section 35 of the Consolidation Act fell for consideration before this court in different cases. In the case of Sheo Kumar Thakur vs. State of Bihar and others (1985 P.L.J.R. 986), the learned Single Judge while held that the bar under section 10A is not applicable in a proceeding under section 35, it observed that the revisional authority can decide a case oh merit if there is irregularity in the proceeding or illegality, impropriety in any order passed by subordinate authority. 8. A Division Bench in the case of Hari Narayan Singh and others vs. State of Bihar and others (1997 Vol. I Ail P.L.R. 302) held that there being non obstante clause in section 35, it cannot be presumed that the Legislature purported to give a wide power to the Director of Consolidation to ignore any bar of limitation provided for filing objection, appeal etc. at different stages and to give it an overriding effect even on section 10A providing bar from raising any objection at any subsequent stage of proceeding it not raised within the stipulated time. 9. In the case of Subedar Mahto vs. The Joint Director of Consolidation and others, in C.W.J.C. No. 5447/87, disposed of on 13th May, 1998 (unreported), [now reported in 1998 (3) PLJR 47] this Court taking into consideration the aforesaid decisions and provisions laid down under section 35 held that the Director can interfere in a matter under section 35, only if there is irregularity in a proceeding or the order passed by subordinate authority is incorrect, illegal or improper.