JUDGMENT :

This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder order dated 26.02.2007 passed by respondent no. 4 in R.P. Case No. 42/2002-03; order dated 10.05.2007 passed by respondent no. 3 in S.A.R. Appeal No. 167/2006-07; and order dated 21.06.2013 passed by respondent no. 2 in S.A.R Revision Case No. 45 of 2007, have been assailed.

2. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner, as per the pleadings made in the writ petition, is that the respondent nos. 6 to 10 had filed an application before the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Jamshedpur in the year 2002 under Section 71-A of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 (in short the ‘Act, 1908’) against the petitioners alleging therein that the petitioners are in possession of the land bearing a portion of plot no. 1426, khata no. 288 of Mouza Ghagidih, Thana No. 1169 measuring an area of 0.29 acres since 1982. On the basis of aforesaid application, R.P. Case No. 42/2002-03 was instituted, in which, the petitioners have been noticed. In pursuance thereof, they have made their appearance and filed show cause stating inter alia that the area, as mentioned in the application as 0.29 acres of plot no. 1426, is incorrect rather the petitioners are in possession over an area of 0.05 acres of land only on the basis of Korfa Tenancy created by the father of the Opposite Parties, namely, Rudia Bhumij, who was the recorded tenant under Khata No. 288 of mouza Ghagidih, and granted Korfa Patta in favour of Shanti Devi and delivered possession of the same after taking Salami with a consideration for payment of Rs. 2/- per year as also permitted to construct residential building and other structures over the aforesaid land measuring an area of 5 decimals to Shanti Devi and accordingly substantial structure have been made over the aforesaid land by making expense of about Rs.4,00,000/-(Rupees Four Lakhs), in which, the family members of the petitioners are residing since 1976.

3. The ground of limitation was also agitated in the show cause stating, inter alia, that period of limitation to file an application under Section 71-A of the Act, 1908 is barred in proceeding for restoration of land after the period of 30 years.

Further ground has been raised that since the nature of the land having been changed and it became Chaparbandi land, therefore provision of Section 71-A of the Act, 1908 will not be attracted since the land has now in the nature of raiyati and it became a Chaparbandi land.

4. The Deputy Commissioner Land Reforms after hearing the parties has passed order on 26.02.2007 against the petitioners for restoration of the land in favour of the actual heirs of the recorded tenants.

The petitioners preferred appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Singhbhum East, being S.A.R. Appeal No. 167/2006-07, which was disposed of vide order dated 10.05.2007.

The petitioners being aggrieved with the order passed by the appellate authority preferred revision, being S.A.R Revision Case No. 45 of 2007, which was dismissed vide order dated 21.06.2013.

5. The petitioners are assailing the order passed by the Original authority-Deputy Collector Land Reforms; the appellate order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Singhbhum East as also order passed by the revisional authority-the Commissioner, Singhbhum (Kolhan) Division, Chaibasa, by way of present writ petition.

6. Mr. Bhaiya V. Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, assailing the impugned orders, has agitated following grounds:

(I). The issue of limitation has not been dealt with by any of the authorities. According to petitioners, the specific plea about limitation has been agitated by the petitioners, at first before the original authority but it was not answered. Again, it was agitated before the appellate authority but not answered and lastly it was agitated before the revisional authority but again it was not answered.

In view thereof, submission has been made that when the issue of limitation goes to the