(1) THIS appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the High court of Karnataka in RSA No. 998 of 1977 dated 27/1/1988 affirming the judgments and decrees of the District Judge, Bijapur in Regular Appeal No. 11 of 1973 and of Munsif, Bagalkot in OS No. 23 of 1968 dated 3/4/1973 under Karnataka Village Offices (Abolition) Act, 1961 (Act No. 14 of 1961, for short the Act. The appellant who was unsuccessful throughout is recorded as a holder of an office as Walikarki but he is granted l/5th share in the plaint schedule properties while the respondents have been granted 4/5th towards their respective shares. His grievance is that he had to get the entire plaint schedule properties. Section 2(b) defines thus:

" authorised holder means a person in whose favour a land granted or continued in respect of, or annexed to, a village office by the State or a part thereof has been validly alienated permanently whether by sale, gift, partition or otherwise, under the existing law relating to such village offices."

Holder of a village office as defined in clause (g) means a person having an interest in a village office under an existing law relating to such office provided that where any village office has been entered in a register or record under an existing law relating to such village office, as held by the whole body of persons having interest in the village office, the whole of such body shall be deemed to be the holder.

(2) "UNAUTHORISED holder" as defined in clause (m) means, "a person in possession of a land granted or continued in respect of or annexed to a village office by the State without any right, or under any lease, mortgage, sale, gift or any other kind of alienation thereof, which is null and void under the existing law, relating to such village office."

(3) "VILLAGE office" is defined in clause (n), the relevance of which is not material for the purpose of this case. Section 3 gives the power of Deputy Commissioner to decide certain questions and appeals arising therefrom. Sub-section (1 says: "If any question arises-

(A) whether any land was granted or continued in respect of or annexed to a village office by the State, or

(B) whether any person is a holder of a village office, or

(C) whether any person is an authorised holder, or

(D) whether any person is an authorised holder, the Deputy Commissioner shall, after giving the party affected an opportunity to be heard and after holding an enquiry in the prescribed manner decide the question."

Consequences of the abolition of village offices have been enumerated together with incidents thereof in Section 4. Section 5 deals with re-grant of land resumed under Section 4 to the holder of the village office which reads thus:

"5. Re-grant of land resumed under Section 4 to the holder of the village office.- (1 A land resumed under clause (3 of Section 4 shall, in cases not falling under Section 6 and Section 7, be granted to the person who was the holder of the village office immediately prior to the appointed date (hereinafter referred to as the holder) on payment, by or on behalf of such holder to the State government, of the occupancy price equal to three times in the case of holders of inferior village offices and six times in the case of holders of other village offices, the amount of the full assessment of such land within the prescribed period and in the prescribed manner and the holder shall be deemed to be an occupant or holder of a ryotwari patta within the meaning of the Code in respect of such land and shall primarily be liable to pay land revenue to the State government from the appointed date in accordance with the provisions of the Code and the rules and orders made thereunder; and all the provisions of the Code and the rules and orders relating to unalienated land or ryotwari land shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, apply to the said land:

PROVIDED that in respect of land which was not assigned