Jurisdiction of revenue authorities in adjudicating on title issues and the significance of the absence of objections for an extended period in land disputes.

JYOTI SARAN, J.

1. Heard Mr. Narayan Singh, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned Government Pleader No.2 for the State.

2. Though private respondent nos.4 and 5 have registered appearance through counsel but there is no representation on their behalf when this matter is taken up for hearing and is being disposed of by this judgment.

3. The two petitioners by this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 12.5.1997 passed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Saran at Chapra (DCLR for the sake of brevity) in Jamabandi Correction Case No.1 of 1996-97, whereby the jamabandi running in the name of the petitioners has been cancelled to be opened in the name of the private respondents. A copy of the order is placed at Annexure-5 to the writ petition. The petitioners have also questioned the order dated 13.11.1997 passed by the Additional Collector, Saran at Chapra in Mutation Revision No.5 of 1997, whereby the appeal (revision) preferred by the petitioners has been dismissed and the second revision arising from Mutation Revision No.73 of 1997-98 preferred by these petitioners before the Commissioner, Saran Division has also been rejected on grounds of maintainability in view of the deletion of section 17 from the Bihar Tenant Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973. A copy of the orders passed by the Additional Collector and the Divisional Commissioner are present at Annexures 6 and 7 respectively.

4. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the two petitioners herein are the lineal descendants of one Marai Singh who was survived by two sons, namely, Janki Singh i.e. petitioner no.1 and Laxmi Singh, i.e. father of petitioner no.2 and one daughter Parwati Devi who was married to Dr. Jai Gopal Lal. It is the case of the petitioners that Marai Singh deceased while in possession of the ancestral land admeasuring about 17 kathas and after his death his widow Tileshwari Kuwar purchased eight plots of land in between the year 1954 to 1968 admeasuring 1 bigha 10 kathas and 18 dhurs, all of which are situated in Village-Jalalpur in the district of Saran and are adjacent to ancestral holdings of these petitioners. It is further the case of these petitioners that since they were minors hence the lands were purchased by the mother of the petitioner no.1 and the grand-mother of petitioner no.2 Tileshwari Kuwar in the name of Jai Gopal Lal, the brother in-law of petitioner no.1 with a view to provide guardianship to the children as well as for protection of the land. It is the case of the petitioners that when they attained majority that they requested to Dr. Jai Gopal Lal to transfer the said eight plots of land which had been purchased by Tileshwari Kuwar in his name, in their favour and on the request so made Dr. Jai Gopal Lal executed a deed of Ladavi on 26.4.1979. It is the case of the petitioners that since the Ladavi was executed by way of family arrangement and that there was no dispute on the issue hence it was executed on a plain paper, a copy of which is present at Annexure-1 to the writ petition. It is next stated that following the Ladavi executed on 26.4.1979 that the two petitioners approached the Circle Officer, Sadar Anchal, Chapra for correction of the Jamabandi which was running in the name of Dr. Jai Gopal Lal to be corrected in their name and for opening the account in their names with the support of the deed of Ladavi as well as the statement made by the wife of late Dr. Jai Gopal Lal, namely, Parwati Devi who deposed in favour of these petitioners and accepted that the lands in fact belonged to her mother and her brothers and that there was no dispute regarding the deed of Ladavi. A copy of the statement of Parwati Devi is present at Annexure-2. It is the specific case of the petitioners that even after execution of the sale deed in