To establish the relationship of landlord and tenant under the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960, a claimant must provide evidence beyond mere possession of the land, including documentary support such as rent receipts or evidence of disputes over rent.

JUDGMENT :

D.P. Mohapatra, J. - The core question which falls for determination in this case is whether there exists the relationship of landlord and tenant between petitioners and opp. party No. 4, Balakrushna Panigrahi, within the meaning of Section 2 (31) of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in respect of the land in dispute. The land in question is 22 acres in extent in village Nuagaon,

2.The revisional order of the Additional District Magistrate,Ganjam (opp. party No 3) dated 23-12-1989(Annexure-9) in which he set aside the appellate order of the Officer-on-Special Duty (opp party No. 2) dated 29-9-1937 (Annexure-5) and confirmed the order of the Revenue Officer, Digapahandi (opp. Party No 1), dated 22-1-1987 (Annexure 4) is assailed in the writ petition. The petitioners have prayed tor quashing the order as per Annexures- 4 and 9.

3. The proceedings were initiated on the applications filed by the petitioners individually in the year 1975 u/s 36-A of the. Act for a declaration that the lands in their position are non-resumable and for determining the fair and equitable rent of the same. Their case, shortly stated, was that they are in cultivating possession of the lands since the time of their forefather for periods ranging between 25 to 40 years on payment of rent to the landlord(opp. party No. 4), that since 1975 the landlord with an ulterior motive refused to accept rent from them.

4. The opp. party No 4 refuted the claim of the petitioners. He denied that they had cultivated his land at any point of time or had paid any rent to him. His case was that the entire land was in his personal cultivation; that in 1975 on the Instigation of U. N. Samaratra with whom he had political rivalry the petitioners trespassed upon the land and raised false claims of tenancy in respect of the same.

5. Both parties led evidence in support of their respective cases. After the first round of challenge before the appellate authority and before this Court in OJC 1901 of 1980 the case was remitted to the Revenue Officer for fresh disposal. The case was again considered by the Revenue Officer, who rejected the petitions holding that the petitioners had failed to establish the relationship of landlord and tenant between themselves and opp. party No. 4. The appellate authority set aside the order, accepted the plea of tenancy of the petitioners and directed the Revenue Officer to issue certificates u/s 29 of the Act vide order dated 22-1-1987 (Annexure-5). The revisional authority set at naught the order of the appellate authority and confirmed the order of the Revenue Officer vide Annexure-9. Therefore, the petitioners have prayed for quashing* the order as per Annexures- 4 and 9 to the writ application.

6. In the backdrop of the facts and circumstances of the case noted above, the point formulated earlier arises for determination. The answer to the question depends on the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Act and appreciation of the evidence on record by the statutory authorities.

Section 2 (31) of the Act defines 'tenant' to mean a person who has no rights in the land of another but under the system generally known as Bhag, Sanja or Kata or such similar expression as under any other system, law, contract, custom or usage personally cultivates such land on payment of rent in cash or in kind or in both or on condition of delivery to that person : (a) either a share of the produce of such land: or (b) the estimated value of a portion of the crop raised on the land; or (c) a fixed quantity of produce irrespective of the yield from the land; or (d) produce or its estimated value partly in any of the ways described above and partly in another.

Section 4 of the Act enumerates the parsons who shall be deemed to be raiyats for the purpose of the Act in respect of the land held by them and vests power in the Revenue Officer to declare a person as a raiyat on submission of application by him. The manner of