BHANWARLAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision against the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jhalawar dated 26-11-62. The brief facts of the case are that this is a case of recovery under Public Demand Recovery Act and the petitioner has come up in revision before the Board of Revenue directly against the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer. The learned counsel for the opposite party has raised a preliminary objection that under sec. 23 (a) of the Public Demand Recovery Act the petitioners ought to have preferred an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority and after exhausting the remedy of appeal they could have come up before the Board of Revenue in revision under sec. 23 (b) of the Public Demand Recovery Act.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that he had filed an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority u/sec. 75 of the Land Revenue Act but the same was returned to him by the Revenue Appellate Authority saying that the appeal does not lie to him. He has conceded that he did not file any appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority under sec. 23 (a) of the Public Demand Recovery Act nor has he come against the order of the Revenue Appellate Authority in which the Revenue Appellate Authority has observed that the appeal does not lie to Revenue Appellate Authority. He has however contended that he can come direct in revision to the Board of Revenue without preferring any appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority and in support he has cited RRD 1962 page 206, RRD 1962 page 136, RRD 1963 page 140, RRD 1964 page 329 and AIR Supreme Court page 497.