Jai Govind Tiwary vs State of Bihar

Mridula Mishra, J.—Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. The petitioner has filed this writ application for quashing the order dated 27.3.2002 passed by the Revenue Officer, Arrah, Bhojpur (Respondent No. 2) whereby petition filed by the petitioner u/s 106 of the B.T. Act has been dismissed as not maintainable for want of notice u/s 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Petitioner alongwith respondent fourth set filed Case No. 3/2001 u/s 106 of the B.T. Act for correction of entry made by the Revenue Officer in the records of rights with reference to factum of possession over the land mentioned in the Schedule. The case was contested by the State and without deciding the case on merit the respondent No. 2 dismissed the case with the finding that since notice u/s 80 of the C.P.C. was not given by the petitioner before instituting the case, as such, the case is not maintainable.

The order is admittedly illegal and without jurisdiction as the scope of Section 106 B.T. Act is confined only to the question of deciding possession. In the present case the petitioner''s only prayer was with regard to correction of entry made in the records of rights and the question of title was not involved. As such, there was no requirement of any notice u/s 80 of the C.P.C.

Considering the jurisdictional error the order dated 27.3.2002 passed by Respondent No. 2 in Case No. 3/2001 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent No. 2 for fresh consideration and to decide the case within the ambit of Section 106 of the B.T. Act. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.