The right of settlement or possession under the Zamindari Act is ascertained based on the entries in village papers and not on the basis of any subsequent inspection report of revenue authorities.

Sujoy Paul, J.

1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution to assail the order of Board of Revenue dated 7.6.2004 passed in Case No. 355/PBR/02 (Annexure P-1). This matter has a chequered history. The respondents herein have fought a long drawn battle in the corridors of Revenue Courts. The respondents (now octogenarian) have initiated the proceeding in the year 1962.

2. The facts as narrated in the impugned order are that the respondents were patta holders of 95 bigha 15 biswa land which was given to them by the Zamindars before the abolition of the Zamindari. The respondents were in continuous possession of the entire land of 95 bigha 17 biswa. However, the Patwari in his record recorded that 25 bigha 1 biswa is being encroached by the respondents. The respondents, with a view to seek correction preferred an application before the Tahsildar court on 14.1.1962. The Tahsildar rejected the said application on 13.9.1966. The respondents preferred an appeal before the Sub Divisional Officer (SDO) which was rejected on 29.7.1967. The respondents preferred appeal against this order before the Additional Commissioner. The said case was registered as Case No. 18/67-68. The appellate authority by order dated 30.7.1968 partly allowed the appeal and ordered that as per Khasra of Samvat 2007, the status of land of appellants therein/present respondents is mentioned as "Khud-kasht", hence as per Government memorandum dated 7.7.1961, the said land can be settled in favour of the present respondents. Accordingly, Tahsildar was ordered to inspect the land and act in accordance with the said memorandum dated 7.7.1961.

3. The Tahsildar in obedience of order dated 30.7.1968 inspected the land on 30.4.1983. He prepared the map and identified the land of the appellants. He found that the disputed land was Khud-kasht land of the Zamindar. The said land is situated within the fencing and is a compact area. He opined that in the light of memorandum dated 7.7.1961, the entire land except land belonging to the well situated in Survey No. 611, 579 and 567, can be settled in favour of present respondents. The said recommendation dated 30.4.1983 (Annexure P-5) was sent to Additional Collector. In turn, the Additional Collector on 15.11.1984 remanded the matter back to the Tahsildar with a note that the settlement of the land should be done as per the memorandum dated 7.7.1961 and not as per the Revenue Books Circular (RBC). On remand, the Tahsildar reported that the land in question is surrounded by other lands of the respondents and it is a grove land. Subject to payment of Rs. 1181/- as a premium amount, he recommended for settlement of this land in favour of the respondents. This recommendation is dated 11.2.1986.

4. The Additional Collector by his order dated 20.7.1987 closed the matter on the ground that as per Government memorandum dated 23.6.1975, now Zamindars cannot be given 20% land. Feeling aggrieved by this order, the respondents filed a first appeal before the Additional Commissioner. The Additional Commissioner by order dated 30.10.1995 allowed the appeal and remanded the matter back to Additional Collector to rehear the parties. The Additional Commissioner agreed with the order dated 27.7.1998 that the memorandum dated 23.6.1975 is not applicable in the present case. On the contrary, the memorandum dated 7.7.1961 is applicable. However, the respondents case was dismissed on the ground that they were unable to prove their possession on disputed survey numbers as on Samvat 2007. The respondents preferred the first appeal which was dismissed by Additional Commissioner on 12.11.2001 (Annexure P-2). This order was assailed before the Revenue Board in Appeal No. 355/PBR-2002. The Board by impugned order dated 7.6.2004 allowed the appeal.

5. Aforesaid factual backdrop makes it clear that the dispute was originally generated on 14.1.1962 when an application for correction of entry was filed by the responden