Moreover the numberification itself made it clear that the rights of private parties were to be determined by means of a proper enquiry.
861 had been companyrectly entered in the name of the Government.
By an indenture of lease dated June 27, 1942, the appellant took from Midnapur Zamindari Company Ltd. a lease in perpetuity on payment of a premium of Rs.
On or about December 6, 1961 the Settlement Officer, Singhbhum, suo motu purported to invite objections regarding the entries in the record of lights relating to the aforesaid land in possession of the appellant.
323 in district Hanbhum.
The numberification companyld number, therefore, extinguish or affect the rights of the appellant number companyld it establish that the State was in khas Possession of the land in question.
860 in Col.
II which is the admitted case of both the parties.
In the grounds of revision it was pointed out that the numberification which had been issued under the Forest Act had number been followed by any action or numberification under Section 30 number had any demarcation of the plots been made.
The question of the title companyld be decided number by the Settlement Officer or by the Commissioner in the proceedings which were taken but it was the Land Reforms Department which alone had the jurisdiction in the matter.
860 and 861.
The Board examined the question of the lease being regarded as an encumberance which was liable to be annulled under Section 4 a of the Reforms Act after the issuance of the numberification under Section 3 or Section 3A of that Act.
The appellant preferred an appeal under the provisions of the Chhota Nagpur Tenancy Act 1908, hereinafter called the Tenancy Act, which was disposed of by the Commissioner of Chhota Nagpur Division on September 16, 1963.
In the settlement proceedings which took place later the demised portions of old plot No.
Under the terms of the said lease the appellant was entitled, interalia, to erect and companystruct buildings, outhouses, garages etc.,
The orders of the Settlement Officer and the Commissioner were affirmed by tt.e Board of Revenue on the ground that plot No.
An alternative companytention was raised that even if the appellant was companysidered to be a tenure holder it was entitled to retain the land as a statutory raiyat under Section 5 of the Reforms Act.
462 were entered as plot No, 859 and portions of the old plot 865 were entered as survey plot Nos.
These plots were shown in the name and possession of the appellant.
The appellant took the matter in revision before the Board of Revenue.
861 only.
The Board of Revenue called for a report with regard to the plots and made it clear that the mam dispute related to plot No.
45, Thana No.
Apart from the other companytentions which were raised before the Board it was argued that although the proprietary rights passed to the Government under the Reforms Act, the lease hold rights were number extinguished and companytinued to vest in the appellant.
to plant trees and lay out gardens, play grounds and dig wells and do all other acts and things necessary for using the land for the persons residing in those buildings and houses.
The State Government was, therefore, justified in including the plots in the numberification issued under Section 29 of the Forest Act and the Settlement Officer had rightly recorded them as belonging to and in possession of the Forest Department.
It was further directed the possession of the Tata Steel Co. Ltd should be recorded in respect of the house standing on plot No.
462 and 465 Khata No.
The entries were ordered to be companyrected accordingly.
He held that the appellant was number in cultivating possession of the plot in question which were number being used for agricultural purposes As such the settlement between the appellant and the Midnapur Zimindari Co Ltd amounted to an encumberance within the meaning of Section 4 a of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, called the Reforms Act.
It was firmly maintained by the appellant that the Commissioner companyld number have given any decision in respect of the nature of the rights of the appellant.
On March 21, 1963 the Settlement Officer passed an order that the plot should be recorded in the name of Bihar Sarkar Forest Department.
Grover, J. This is an appeal by special leave from an order of the Board of Revenue, Bihar State, by which the orders of the Commissioner and the Settlement Officer relating to certain lands which had been taken on lease by the appellant from the Midnapur Zamindari Company Ltd. to be affirmed.
5952 2 0 a block of land including a parcel of 6.47 acres in Mauza Khokhro within the old survey plot Nos.
