KUSUM DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Subodh Prasad, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Anjani Kumar, learned Additional Advocate General-4, for the State of Bihar.

(2.) The reference made by the Division Bench on 6th of Dec., 2012 raising the question of the jurisdiction vested with the Additional Collector to hear a revision petition under Sec. 16 of the Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 has been placed before us to be answered in the light of a perceived conflict between two Division Bench judgements in the case of Kapildeo Singh & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. reported in, 2003 2 PLJR. 431; and in the case of Amarendra Kumar Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. reported in, 2011 3 PLJR. 422.

(3.) The provision conferring powers on the Additional Collector in terms of Sec. 2(c) of the Act has been perused by us and what we find is that the judgement in the case of Kapildeo Singh (supra) was delivered on the basis of the provisions that were existing then and, in our opinion, the same does not require any further interpretation as there is no conflict with the later judgement in the case of Amarendra Kumar Singh (supra), inasmuch as, after the Notification dated 28th of May, 2008, the position stood altered whereby the Additional Collector was empowered to exercise the power of the Collector as held in the case of Amarendra Kumar Singh (supra). Thus, all such matters which arose prior to the Notification dated 28th of May, 2008 were to be governed by the law existing then as held in the case of Kapildeo Singh (supra), whereas after the Notification, the law declared in the case of Amarendra Kumar Singh (supra) held the field. Thus the provisions being different prior to the issuance of the Notification dated 28th of May, 2008, there is no conflict at all between the two Division Bench decisions so as to be resolved by us.