Tapen Sen, J.

1. In this Writ Application the petitioner, who is the Manager of "Sri Digambar Jain Bispanthi Kothi" at Madhuban in the District of Giridih, has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 6.5.2002 as contained in Annexure-7 passed by the respondent No. 2 in Misc. Revision Case No. 14/2000 allowing the revision filed by the respondent No. 6. The ground for making the said prayer is that Commissioner, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh (respondent No. 2) had no jurisdiction to entertain a second revision under the Bihar Tenants Holding (Maintenance of Record) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity and precision as the said Act).

2. Let it be recorded that by reason of the impugned Order, the respondent No. 2 observed as follows :--

"Though the OP claims to be in possession but they failed to adduce any evidence to the effect as to how they obtained the ownership over the land in dispute. They even failed to adduce evidence about legal possession over the land in dispute. From records it transpires that entire claim of OP is based on forged and fabricated documents i.e. hukumnama and Government rent receipt. Mere possession does not confer any right and title to them to hold the land in dispute, when the same is encircled from all directions by the land of the petitioners. It is well established that any Government land cannot be claimed by any individual or organization only because some revenue officer has allowed issue of rent receipt in his favour. It is also clear that the proprietary of the entire land was purchased by the petitioner way back in 1911 and after that date the outgoing landlord lost all interest in the land and had no right to settle the land or a part thereof in favour of anybody. The hukumnama on the basis of which OP claims title or possession even if not forged is without any authority.

Further the land in dispute is a part of forest and is so recorded in Survey Khatiyan also. Hence the construction made over the land in dispute by the OP are in violation of Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980."

The word "OP" referred to in the impugned Order of the Commissioner means the petitioner herein while the words petitioner referred to therein means the respondent No. 6 herein.

3. Detailed submissions, both of substance and erudition, were advanced by the respective learned counsel for the parties, namely Mr. Ram Balak Mahto and Mr. U.N. Bacchawat, Senior Advocates, but considering the fact that this can be disposed off on a short point, this Court is not inclined to deal with all the points arguments because if it is so done then it would have the effect of giving findings which would affect rights and title of the parties, including that of the State. It would, therefore, only be necessary to deal with the relevant points together with some of the factual aspects which are involved herein so as to arrive at a reasonable conclusion. The facts pleaded in the Writ Application are as follows :

1. Factual Background

(3) (a) The most important and venerated place of worship and pilgrimage of the Jain community is the Sri Sammad Shikhar" popularly " referred to as the Parasnath hill situated in the district of Giridih within the State of Jharkhand.

(3) (b) The Jain community consider this place to be the sanctum sanctorum from where, they believe, that at least 20 out of the 24 "tirthankars" attained their salvation from the different peaks of the said hill and who, left their "Charan Chinhas" (foot impressions) which are said to be located on these peaks. These holy places are visited and worshiped by the Jains in multitudinous numbers each years. The foot impressions are located in the shrines which are to be found at heights more than 4000 Feet above mean sea level and the devotees arduously undertake journey of about 30 Kilometers from the foot hill at Madhuban to reach these holy shrines situated at the top of the hill.

(3) (c) The tr