The Land Reforms Commission lacks jurisdiction to dismiss a settlement revision petition based solely on the timing of civil suit publication.

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C.BEHERA Date of Hearing :29.07.2025 :: Date of Judgment :31.07.2025 A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioners praying for quashing the final order dated 22.04.2025 (Annexure-4) passed in Settlement Revision Petition No.216 of 2022 under Section 15(b) of the O.S. & S. Act, 1958 by the Land Reforms Commissioner (Board of Revenue), Odisha, Cuttack (Opposite Party No.3).

2. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned ASC for the State (O.P. Nos.1 to 3).

3. The case of the petitioners is that, they (petitioners) filed the revision vide Settlement Revision Petition No.216 of 2022 under Section 15(b) of the O.S. & S. Act, 1958 praying for correction of the R.o.R. of the case land vide Khata No.177, Plot No.548, area A0.29 decimals, kissam Gharabari from the name of Bana Bibhaga to the name of the petitioners as per the judgment and decree passed on dated 27.01.2004 and 12.02.2004 respectively in T.S. No.153 of 1997 by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Kujang. But, the Land Reforms Commissioner (Board of Revenue), Odisha, Cuttack (O.P. No.3) dismissed to that Settlement Revision Petition No.216 of 2022 of the petitioners as per its final order dated 22.04.2025 (Annexure-4) only on the sole ground that, “as the suit vide T.S. No.153 of 1997 was filed after publication of the Hal R.o.R. and the filing of the said suit was post publication of the R.o.R., for which, the Land Reforms Commissioner (Board of Revenue), Odisha, Cuttack (O.P. No.3)

lacks its jurisdiction to entertain the same.”

4. Now the question arises, “whether any suit for declaration of title in respect of the suit properties is entertainable under law before the Civil Court after publication of the Hal R.o.R. and whether on the basis of the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court, the Settlement Authority including the Revenue Authority i.e. Land Reforms Commissioner (Board of Revenue), Odisha, Cuttack (O.P. No.3) can pass order for correction of the R.o.R. of the case land on the basis of the judgment and decree of the civil suit?”

5. On this aspect the propositions of law has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decisions:-

(i) In a case between Rasogolla Jhankar Vrs. Gobardhan Kuanar (dead) and others decided on 20.05.2024 in S.A. No.346 of 1988 (Orissa) at Para-22 that, the entries in the settlement themselves neither creates title nor extinguishes it and it is always open to the Civil Court to find the real holder of title of the suit properties despite entries made in the settlement papers.

(ii) In a case between State of Orissa Vrs. Mst. Pama Mali reported in1978 (1) C.W.R. 209 that, suit based on title does not come within the ambit of Section 42 of the O.S. & S. Act, 1958. The plaintiffs’ suit being based on antecedent title, they are entitled to succeed, unless, the defendants establish loss of plaintiffs’ title by adverse possession.

(iii) In a case between Lokanath Misra Vrs. State of Orissa and others reported in 50 (1980) CLT (Notes 3) 2 that, the settlement entry is subject to decision of the Civil Court in a suit. The Civil Court has jurisdiction to nullify the findings of the Board of Revenue. The decision of the Settlement Commissioner, which is not in accordance with the Civil Court decree, is not sustainable.

(iv) In a case betweenSmt. Manjubala Pattanayak Vrs. State of Orissa and others reported in2001 (I) OLR 530 and in a case between Dr. Gati Krisna Misra Vrs. State of Orissa and others reported in2002 (I) OLR 69 that, as per Rule 34 of Orissa Survey and Settlement Rules, 1962, it is the duty of the Revenue Authority to act i