M.V. Eqbal, J.

1. The petitioners being not satisfied with the appellate order, dated 21.5.1997 in SAR Appeal No. 93/R-15/93-94 passed by Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, as affirmed by order, dated 7.9.1999 in SAR Revision No. 259/97 by the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division. Ranchi have challenged both of them.

2. The dispute relates to land measuring 1.23 acres of plot No. 248 under Khata No. 74 situated in Mouza Hatma. PS Lalpur in the district of Ranchi. The case of petitioners is that the land in question was purchased by their father Late Jugal Kishore Sahu from Mangra Oraon by registered sale-deed dated 12.7.1958 on payment of consideration amount of Rs. 2,000/-. It originally belonged to landlord. Khan Bahadur M.H. Rahman, who by its hukwnnama, dated 6.11.1952 earlier transferred the right and title in favour of Mangra Oraon for construction of a house, well, etc.. the land being uncultivable and barren. Further, according to petitioners, Late Jugal Kishore Sahu constructed a pucca dwelling on the land in dispute and the same is chaparbandi land. In this connection reliance has been placed on hukumnomo, dated 6.11.1952 and the rent receipts as contained in Annexure 3 series, where lands were shown to be chaparbandi lands.

3. After about 30 years, Mangra Oraon (Now deceased) filed a petition for restoration under Section 71-A of the CNT Act alleging fraud played by late Jugal Kishore Sahu in obtaining the land in question. It was registered as SAR Case No. 222/87-88 wherein Late Jugal Kishore Sahu appeared and objected the prayer on the ground that the land in question was chaparbandi land and thus, provision of Section 71-A was not applicable. On hearing the parties the Special Officer, Schedule Area Regulation, Ranchi by its order, dated 29.9.1993 held the land as chaparbandi, dismissed the application for restoration but taking into consideration the fact that Late Mangra Oraon was adivasi passed order under 2nd Proviso to Section 71-A of the CNT Act for payment of compensation of Rs. 2 lacs to the heirs, respondent Nos. 6 and 7, they having substituted, in the meantime in place of Late Mangra Oraon.

4. The respondent Madan Oraon (son of Late Mangra Oraon) moved before the appellate authority in SAR Appeal No. 93/R-15/ 93-94. It was heard by Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, who vide impugned order, dated 21.5.1997 held that there was no structure over the land in question: disbelieved the stand that the lands in question were chaparbandi, held the land as a raiyati and the transfer made in 1958 in violation of provisions of Sections 46 and 49 of CNT Act. appeal was allowed, vide order, dated 21.5.1997 and the lower Courts order was set-aside with a direction to restore the lands in question in favour of respondent Nos. 6 and 7.

5. The petitioners being aggrieved moved in SAR Revision No. 259/97 and brought to the notice of learned Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi, a report submitted by Circle Officer. Sadar, Ranchi, contained in letter No. 47(ii), dated 9.4.1997. The petitioners placing reliance on the said report tried to justify their stand that the land in question was chaparbandi but the revision application was not entertained, nor admitted and rejected vide impugned order, dated 7.9.1999 on the ground that plea was not taken that the appeal as was preferred by the petitioners,

6. At this stage, it is mentioned that petitioners earlier moved this Court in CWJC No. 1344/98(R) which was disposed of on 28th July, 1998 without interference as a revision application was pending, but interim order of stay was passed till the final hearing in the revision case. The respondent Nos. 6 and 7 on their appearance has taken plea that land in question is TSNR-L in terms of Annexure 1 page 28 and no substantial structure standing over the same and thus, disputed the claim of petitioners that it was a chaparbandi land. It is alleged that the hukumnoma as contained in Annexure 2 is forged and fabricated document an