KAMLA KANT MISHRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 22.03.2002 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Banmankhi, Purnea, respondent No. 2, on an appeal filed by the respondent No. 3 arising out of a proceeding under Section 48(D) of the Bihar Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), whereby and whereunder the order dated 16.09.1995 passed by the Circle Officer, Banmankhi dismissing the application filed by the respondent No. 3 has been set aside.

(3.) The relevant facts, in short, is that the respondent No. 3 filed an application for declaring his occupancy Raiyati right with respect to plot Nos. 1789 & 1995 over an area of 05. acres & 0.30 acres respectively situated in village- Mirchabari, Gayapur appertaining to Thana No. 354, Khata No. 131 under sub division Banmankhi, District- Purnea. The application was dismissed by the Circle Officer, Banmankhi as per the order dated 16.09.1995 (Annexure-1) primarily on the ground that before claiming the Raiyati right under Section 48(D) of the Act, the applicant is required to get himself declared as under Raiyat first under Section 48(E) of the Act. The respondent No. 3 on being aggrieved filed appeal before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Banmankhi, respondent No. 2, vide Revenue Appeal No. 43 of 1995-96. The respondent No. 2 called for the lower Court record of Case No. 147 of 1994-95 as mentioned in the memo of appeal and found that the description of the land and the name of the parties do not tally with the claims made by the appellant, which was in respect of land detailed in Case No. 146 of 1994-95. The appeal was accordingly dismissed on account of above discrepancy by order dated 13.01.2001 (Annexure-2). The respondent No. 3 on learning about the above discrepancy on account of which his appeal was dismissed as aforesaid, filed an application for review of the above order dated 13.01.2001 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Banmankhi, respondent No. 2, which was registered as Case No. 43 of 1995-96/2 of 2000-01. The respondent No. 2 on hearing the parties i.e. the petitioner and the respondent No. 3 accepted the application and fixed for hearing of the appeal on merits by its order dated 19.11.2001, as contained in Annexure-A to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No. 2. Further dates were fixed in the appeal when petitioner as well as the respondent No. 3 appeared and took necessary steps and also filed their respective written arguments on merits of the matter. The respondent No. 2 heard the appeal on merits and disposed of the same by the impugned order dated 22.03.2002 (Annexure-6) whereby the appeal was partly allowed considering the submissions and the documents filed by the parties. The respondent No. 2 allowed the claim of the respondent No. 3 with respect to plot No. 1789 over 0.51 acres of land only and did not allow his claim with respect to plot No. 1995 over 0.30 acres of land.