S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.

1. The writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners against the appellate order dated 23rd May, 2002 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Santhal Parganas Division, Dumka, in R.M. Appeal No. 142 of 1997/ 98, whereby and whereunder, the order dated 20th June. 1997 passed by Settlement Officer, Dumka in R.E. Case No. 1 of 1997-98/MP Case No. 53 of 1990 has been set aside.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the lands, in question, were recorded in the last survey settlement in the names of their ancestors, who are Scheduled Tribes. The lands are non-transferable, Jamabandi lands of Scheduled Tribes (Santhals). Its acquisition was made in favour of non-tribal ex-landlord, which was illegal,

3. It appears that out of 8 Bighas, 16 Kathas and 12 Dhurs of lands of Mouza Sarasdangal disputed 6 Bighas, 13 Kathas and 1 Dhur of Raiyati agricultural lands were acquired by the S.D.O., Dumka in L.A. Case No. 5 of 36-37 in favour of the landlord Noni Gopal Banerjee under Section 25 (A) of Regulation II of 1886 (The Santhal Parganas Rent Regulation, 1886) after following the prescribed procedure and on payment of compensation to the jamabandi raiyat. Therefore, possession of the acquired land was delivered to ex-landlord, Noni Gopal Banerjee through the machinery of the Court.

The aforesaid 6 Bighas, 13 Kathas and 1 Dhur of lands was subsequently transferred by the ex-landlord in favour of one Basudeo Bhagat and Ramdeo Bhagat, ancestors of the private respondents by a registered deed dated 25th February, 1938.

4. According to the Respondents, further 2 Bighas, 3 Katha and 11 Dhurs of lands of Plot No. 437 within J.B. No. 103 was also settled with Basudeo Bhagat and Ramdeo Bhagat by the then landlord by a separate registered Patta Deed No. 255 of 1938. In this way, total 8 Bighas 16 Kathas and 12 Dhurs of land of Mouza Sarasdangal were transferred/settled in favour of Basudeo Bhagat and Ramdeo Bhagat, ancestors of the private respondents for Basuri purpose i.e. for holding a hat over the lands.

5. Further case of the private respondents is that Basudeo Bhagat and Ramdeo Bhagat came in possession over the aforesaid lands and started paying rent. Thereafter, they also constructed residential buildings and Pucca Well over the aforesaid lands; some portions of the lands were also used as Orchard and to hold hat.

Their further case is that at the time of vesting of the estate in the State of Bihar. the ex-landlord has shown the ancestors of private respondents as raiyats in the return submitted by them on the basis of which the names of the ancestors of the private respondents were entered in Register II maintained in the Circle Office.

In the year 1976-77, a petition under Section 20 of the Santhal Parganas Tenancy Act, 1949 (SPTAct, 1949 for short) was filed by the Circle Officer, Shikaripara in the Court of S.D.O., Dumka for eviction of the private respondents from the land in question. It was registered as R.M. Case No. 207 of 1976-77. Said application was rejected by the S.D.O., Dumka, vide in his order dated 5th June, 1979 but the appeal preferred against the same, being Revenue Misc. Case No. 665 of 1979-80 in the Court of the Deputy Commissioner, Dumka was allowed vide order dated 21st June, 1982.

Against the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, the private respondents moved before the Divisional Commissioner, Bhagalpur in S.P. Rev. Misc. Case No. 60 of 1982-83. In the said case, the father of two of the petitioners who was also brother of one of the petitioners intervened and was impleaded as party to that case. After hearing the parties, the Divisional Commissioner, Bhagalpur allowed S.P. Rev. Misc. Case No. 60 of 1982-83 against which no further appeal/revision or writ petition was preferred by the ancestors of petitioners or the petitioners. The order of Divisional Commissioner, Bhagalpur become final and conclusive.

During the present survey settlement operation, at Tasdik stage, Khata of the lands, i