Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Dr. ANSHUMAN, J.
CWJC No.902 of 2023
(18.8.2023)
Praveen Kumar Mishra ... Petitioner
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents
Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 – Section 7 – Tarmim/Implementation of direction passed by final authority in revision case relating to consolidation matter – It is Consolidation Officer-cum-Circle Officer of area who is responsible to implement/Tarmim decision which has attained finality under Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 – Anchal Adhikari-cum-Consolidation Officer directed to implement order passed by authority on being satisfied that it acquires finality. (Paras 5 and 6)
Dr. Anshuman, J. – Learned counsel for the State seeks permission to file hard copy of the counter affidavit in the Court, which is accepted and kept on record.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State are present.
3. Vide order dated 26.06.2023 it has been ordered to the counsel for the State to file a counter affidavit at the level of the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms to ascertain that who is the responsible Officer for Tarmim/Implementation of the direction passed by the final authority in revision case relating to consolidation matter.
4. The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms has executed affidavit. In paragraph-8 of the counter affidavit, the answer of Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms is as follows: –
“ That to answer the specific question raised by the Hon’ble Court pertaining to the powers of Tarmim/Implementation, it is humbly submitted and stated that the concerned Circle Officer of the area is vested with the power of the Consolidation Officer, who in turn shall carry out implementation of any order passed by the revisional authority which has attained finality under the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation act, 1956. The said arrangement flows out of the above mentioned Notification No. 46 dated 09.01.1999.”
5. In view of the specific answer at the level of Principal Secretary of the Revenue and Land Reforms, it is the Consolidation Officer-cum-Circle Officer of the area is responsible to implement/Tarmim the decision, which has attained finality under the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956.
6. In this background, the present writ petition is disposed off directing the respondent no. 7 to implement the order passed by the authority on being satisfied that it acquires finality.
The judgment emphasizes compliance with procedural mandates in land disputes and confirms the affirmation of lower court orders regarding property rights.
The court emphasized the importance of expeditious disposal of representations and directed the respondent to pass a speaking order within a specified time frame.
The failure to frame issues and allow evidence in property disputes violates procedural fairness, necessitating remand for proper adjudication.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation under Section 48 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, cannot re-appreciate evidence or substitute findings made by subordinate authorities unless empo....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
