The Commissioner has the discretion to call for and examine the records of any case decided or proceedings taken by any subordinate authority under Section 37(1) of the Act. This discretion should not be arbitrary but judicious and is intended to satisfy the Commissioner as to the regularity of the proceedings or the correctness, legality, or propriety of any order passed by the subordinate authority.

JUDGMENT :

R.K. Patra, J. - Messrs Modern Fabricators and Smt. Arati Mohanty who are two of the opposite parties in these writ petitions, filed an application (vide R.C.No. KR 114 of 1995) u/s 37(1) of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (in short, 'the Act') before the Commissioner, Consolidation, Orissa, Bhubaneswar. By a speaking order dated 18.10.1996 the Commissioner has admitted the said revision for hearing on merits. The writ petitioners, who are arrayed as opposite parties in the said revision, have filed these three writ petitions challenging the aforesaid order. According to the petitioners, the Commissioner erred in exercise of his jurisdiction in admitting the revision and he ought to have rejected it at the threshold.

2. In order to appreciate the contention of the counsel for parties, it is necessary to refer to the previous litigation between the parties which came to be decided in the common judgment of this Court in Modern Fabricators, firm and Others Vs. Rajendra Harichandan and Others, .

3. FACTS :

The disputed land measuring Ac. 3.200 decimals appertaining to plot No. 55/1877 is located in mouza Patrapada. One Abhimanyu Mishra was recorded as tenant in respect of it vide Lease Case No. 477/1966-67. During consolidation operation, it was subdivided into three plots, i.e. plot Nos. 294, 295 and 296. Abhimanyu Mishra while possessing the disputed land as exclusive owner sold it along with another piece of land measuring A. 0.02 decimals of plot No. 769 to one Manoranjan Dash by Registered Sale Deed No. 3285 dated 26.4.1976 for Rs. 3500/-. He later cancelled the aforesaid sale deed as per the Unilateral Registered Cancellation Deed No. 3299 dated 7.5.1977 alleging fraud and non-payment of consideration and received back the sale deed from the Registrar's Office. Out of the disputed land, he (Abhimanyu Mishra) transferred Ac. 1.250 decimals to one Sukanta Charan Samantray as per Registered Sale Deed No. 5924 dated 1.8.1978, Ac. 1.250 decimals to one Dhuleswar Samantray as per Registered Sale Deed No. 5925 and Ac. 0.700 decimals to one Rajendra Harichandan as per Registered Sale Deed No. 2560 dated 28.3.1979. The vendees, namely, Sukanta Charan Samantray, Dhuleswar Samantray and Rajendra Harichandan, immediately after purchase filed Objection Case Nos. 84/28, 83/27 and 80/24 respectively and land record was prepared in their names. The first vendee-Manoranjan Dash who had purchased the disputed land on 26.4.1976 by Registered Sale Deed No. 3285 transferred an area of Ac. 2.00 decimals to M/s. Modern Fabricators vide Registered Sale Deed No. 2073 dated 9.3.1979 and an area of Ac. 1.200 decimals to Smt. Arati Mohanty vide R.SD.No. 2073 for Rs. 37,500/-. They being the bona fide purchasers of-the suit land and being in possession of it, mutated their names vide Mutation Case Nos. 396 and 397 of 1979. In 1981, Sukanta Charan Samantray who had purchased an area of Ac. 1.250 decimals out of the disputed land from the original lease-holder sold it for the second time to Kailash Narayan Singh Deo and M.V.Singh vide R.S.D.No. 9354 dated 21.12.1981. Dhuleswar Samantray similarly sold an area of Ac. 1.250 decimals to Smt. Minakhee Devi vide Registered Sale Deed No. 9353 dated 21.12.1981. After publication of the land records, M/s. Modern Fabricators and Smt. Arati Mohanty filed Objection Case Nos. 316/207, 317/ 208, 318/209, 319/210, 320/21 1 and 321/212 before the Consolidation Officer to record their names. The Consolidation Officer after due inquiry by order dated 4.6.1981 directed to recqrd the disputed land in favour of M/s. Modern Fabricators and Smt. Arati Mohanty. The aforesaid order was challenged by filing appeal before the Deputy Director, Consolidation, Bhubaneswar, by Rajendra Harichandan, Kailash Narayan Singh Deo and Minakhee Devi in Appeal Nos. 44 and 45 of 1 982, 47 and 48 of 1982 and 49 and 50 of 1982. The Deputy Director, Consolidation, by a common order dat