The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dispute regarding the petitioner's status as the daughter of Hari Narain Tiwari and Pawdhari Devi falls under the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and the remedy for the petitioner lies in the civil court.

S.K.Katriar, J.

1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 20.9.1993 (Annexure-3), passed by the Principal, Consolidation Training Institute, Patna, in Revision Case No. 248 of 1988 (Shrikant Pandey and others V/s. Shyam Dulari Devi and others), and Revision Case No. 249 of 1988 (Shrikant Pandey and others V/s. Shyam Dulari Devi and others), in purported exercise of powers under Section 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (herinafter referred to as the Act), whereby he allowed the revision applications of respondent nos. 4 to 6 herein, has set aside the orders of the learned first authority and the appellate authority, and held that the petitioner is not the daughter of Hari Narain Tiwari and Pawdhari Devi.

2. According to the writ petition, the following genealogy of the parties is relevant in the present context :

3. Hari Narain Tiwari and Jeev Narain Tiwari were the two sons of Mani Tiwari. The petitioner claims to be the daughter of Hari Narain Tiwary and Pawdhari Devi. He (Hari Narain Tiwari) is said to have died in the year 1956. It is further stated in the writ petition that Jeev Narain Tiwari was a reasonable and considerate person and there was no problem in the family so long he was alive. After death in 1986, respondent no. 6 (Most. Asharfi Kuer, widow of Jeev Narain Tiwari) started alienating the properties. Soon thereafter the petitioner had taken steps for mutation of the lands in question which was allowed and maintained up to the level of Commissioner as per his order dated 27.6.1989, passed in Revision Case No. 119 of 1989. The consolidation operations were going on in the area and the petitioner submitted her claim with the prayer to record the lands in question in her name, being the sole surviving heir of her parents. The same was allowed by order dated 27.6.1987, (Annexure-1), passed in Case No. 2 of 1987-88 under Section 10(B) of the Act. This gave rise to two appeals at the instance of the private respondents which were rejected by order dated 2.12.1987 (Annexure-2/1), passed on Appeal No. 471 of 1987-88 (Most. Asharafi Kuwar V/s. Shyam Dulari Devi), and order dated 30.11.1987 (Annexure-2), and the analogous Appeal No. 472 of 1987-88 (Most, Asharfi Kuwar V/s. Shyam Dulari Devi).

Aggrieved by the orders, the private respondents preferred two revision applications which were allowed by the impugned order dated 20.9.1993 (Annexure-3), the orders of the learned first authority and the learned appellate authority have been set aside and it has, inter alia, been held that the petitioner is not the daughter of Hari Narain Tiwary and Pawdhari Devi. Hence this revision application at the instance of the petitioner.

4. While assailing the validity of the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Principal of the Consolidation Training Institute cannot ex-ercise revisional powers under Section 35 of the Act in view of the scheme of the Act and the judgment reported in 2002(3) P.L.J.R. 633 (Rajdeo Rai and others V/s. The State of Bihar and others). He next submits that the learned first authority and the appellate authority have held that the petitioner is the daughter of Hari Narain Tiwari and Pawdhari Devi which, being issue of facts, cannot be set aside by the learned revisional authority in view of the scope of Section 35 of the Act. He relies on the following judgments:

(1)1994(3) J.T. 341=1994 Suppl. (2) SCC 198 (Ram Dular V/s. Dy. Director of Consolidation, Jaunpur and others);

(2) 1974 P.L.J.R. 27 (Nand Kumar Rai and others V/s. State of Bihar and others);

(3) 2001 (1) P.L.J.R. 266 (Ramotar Yadav and others V/s. The State of Bihar and others);

(4) 1996(2) P.L.J.R. 890 (Kailash Rai and others V/s. The Joint Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna and others);

(5) 1996(2) P.L.J.R. 924 (Jagu Mallah and others V/s. The State of Bihar and others);

(6) 1978 B.B.C.J. (SC) 12 (Thakur Das (dead) by R.Rs V/s. State of Madh