K.Venkataswami, J.

1. This L.P.A. is preferred against the judgment and order dated 9.2.1994 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8745 of 1993.

2. The appellant in this appeal is respondent No. 6 in C.W.J.C. No. 8745/93. Respondent No. 6 to 10 herein were the petitioners in the said G.W.J.C. Before the learned single Judge and orders passed by the fourth respondent herein in Municipal Survey Appeal Nos. 171 and 172 of 1988 dated 24.9.1989 were challenged. The learned single Judge found that at the relevant time when the impugned orders were passed on the appeals the fourth respondent had no power to pass the same. On that ground alone, without going into the merits of the case, the learned single Judge allowed the writ application with liberty to the parties to prefer Municipal Survey appeals before an appropriate authority if so advised. Aggrieved by the above decision of the learned single Judge the present appeal is filed.

3. As the only question that has to be decided in this appeal is with reference to the competency of the fourth respondent to deal with the appeals placed before him, it is not necessary to set out in detail the facts involved in this case. However, brief facts need be stated to appreciated the question of law raised before us.

4. In the year 1984-85 the municipal survey was started in the district of Bhojpur. We are concerned here with the lands appertaining to Khata Nos. 1520, 1521 and 1539 measuring a total area of 9.76 acres of Mouza Hamidpur, Motitola of Arrah town under Tauzi No. 291 (vide para 5 of writ application). The lands in question were recorded in survey proceedings as Anabad Bihar Sarkar land. Aggrieved by that both the father of the appellant as well as respondent Nos. 6 to 10 (rival parties) preferred objection cases under Rule 9 of Bihar and Orissa Municipal Survey Rules (hereinafter called as the Rule). Those objection cases were numbered as 90 of 86 and 47 of 85 respectively. Those objection cases were disposed of by the first authority on 14.6.1988 confirming the survey entry as mentioned above and consequently rejecting the objection cases. Aggrieved by the above mentioned order of the first authority both the father of the appellant, as well as respondent Nos. 6 to 10 preferred the appeals to the appellate authority appointed under Bihar & Orissa Municipal Survey Act, 1920 (hereinafter called as the Act) read with the rules framed thereunder. The appeals preferred by the father of the appellant was numbered as Municipal Survey No. 172 of 1988 and appeals preferred by respondent No. 6 to 10 was numbered as Municipal Survey No. 171 of 1988. It may be mentioned here at this juncture that counsel on both sides agreed that the appeals were filed before the then Collector of Bhojpur who was appointed as Superintended of Municipal Survey cum Collector, Bhojpur by a notification issued under Sec. 41(1) of the Act dated 24.11.1988 who will be the Appellate authority constituted as per Rule 15 of the Rules. He, however, forwarded those appeals to the fourth respondent, who was also appointed as Superintendent of Municipal Survey cum Charge Officer under an earlier notification issued under Sec. 4(1) of the Act dated 29.9.1986. It is also common ground and accepted by counsel on both the parties that neither the appellant nor respondent Nos. 6 to 10 raised any objection before the fourth respondent challenging his jurisdiction to hear the appeals. On the other hand both the parties, it must be said, took a chance before the fourth respondent by arguing their respective cases. One more factor also must be stated here, namely, that before the orders impugned in the writ application were passed by the fourth respondent on 23.5.1989 the third respondent, who on earlier occasion forwarded the appeals for disposal, recalled the files from the fourth respondent by proceedings dated 23.5.1989. However, without giving effect to the recall order of the third respondent the fourth respondent disposed of the a