The revisional authority must exercise its power within a reasonable time and in a reasonable manner, depending on the facts and circumstances of each case.

JUDGMENT

S. K. Sahoo, J. - The petitioners in this writ petition have challenged the impugned order dated 30.04.1994 passed by the Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack in O.E.A. Revision Case No.46 of 1992 vide Annexure-7 in exercise of the power under section 38 B of the Odisha Estates Abolition Act, 1951 (hereafter 'O.E.A. Act') in setting aside the order dated 30.07.1979 of the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar passed in Vesting Case No.795/70-71 vide Annexure-4.

2. The case of the petitioners is that on 25.04.1936 through Hata Patta, Raja Madhusudan Dev of Patia gave the agricultural land situated in Mouza Chandrasekharpur, area Ac.1.43 dec. and Ac.1.07 dec. in sabik plot nos.300 and 299 respectively in favour of late Anadi Charan Sahoo, the grandfather of the petitioners for cultivation as a tenant under him. The said land corresponds to Hal Plot nos.334 and 335 respectively under Rakhit Holding no.472. The status of land in dispute was 'Niji Chasa' as per R.O.R. published in the year 1931 vide Annexure-1. The grandfather of the petitioners being a tenant under Raja of Patia, paid the rent which was accepted by Raja of Patia and rent receipt thereof was issued vide Annexure-2. In the year 1943, Raja of Kanika purchased the estate of Patia by auction and became landlord in respect of agricultural land in dispute and grandfather of the petitioners became deemed tenant under Raja of Kanika, who also accepted the rent for the year 1943 onwards and issued rent receipts in favour of the grandfather of the petitioners. The estates were vested in the State Government in the year 1954 and accordingly, estate of Kanika was vested in the said year and grandfather of the petitioners being in possession of the agricultural land in dispute by raising paddy crops became tenant under State Government by paying rent. The Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar initiated a proceeding under section 8(1) of the 'O.E.A. Act' to enquire about the possession and tenancy of the grandfather of the petitioners and the same was registered as Vesting Case No.795/70-71 and after due enquiry and on receipt of Amin's report, he passed the order dated 30.07.1979 (Annexure-4) in favour of the grandfather of the petitioners and held him to be a tenant and settled the land with him. The R.O.R. was corrected in exercise of the powers conferred under Rule 34 of the Odisha Survey and Settlement Rules, 1962 and published accordingly in the year 1981 vide Annexure-5 recording the name of late Anadi Charan Sahoo in respect of land in dispute and rent was paid and accepted by the State Government for the years 1974 to 1981, 1982 to 1985, 1985-1986 and for the year 1989 to 1994 and rent receipts were issued vide Annexures-8/a, 8/b, 8/c, 8/d, 8/e, 8/f and 8/g annexed to the affidavit of petitioner no.2 Jitendra Kumar Sahoo dated 13.08.2019. The petitioners in shape of memo filed the order sheet of Suit No.2794 of 1987 initiated under section 22(3) of Odisha Survey and Settlement Act, 1958 by the Settlement Authority and the order sheet indicates that notice was issued to the G.A. Department who did not appear and participate in the enquiry in respect of village-Chandrasekharpur, P.S.-New Capital, Unit No.41, Dist.- Puri and the grandfather of the petitioners was accepted as 'stitiban rayat' and accordingly, R.O.R. was published in the year 1988 and the grandfather of the petitioners was recorded as 'stitiban status' and the State Government accepted rent for the year 2000 to 2001 and issued rent receipt in favour of late Anadi Charan Sahoo. On the basis of reference from Collector, Puri for revising the aforesaid order dated 30.07.1979 of Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar passed in Vesting Case No.795/70-71, O.E.A. Revision Case No.46 of 1992 under section 38-B of the O.E.A. Act was initiated by the Member, Board of Revenue. In the reference letter, it was indicated that while recognizing Anadi Charan Sahoo as a tenant under section 8(1) of the O.E.A. Act and correcting the current R.O.R., the Ta