of 1979 in the companyrt of Additional District Magistrate, Mayutbhanj and the same was allowed vide judgment and order dated December 1980.
The matrix of the case in O.J.C. No.
2 filed O.L.R. Appeal No.
The respondent No.
1 filed O.L.R. Revi sion No.
5, Smt.
2 was shown as belonging to Dhoba by caste which is recognised as a Scheduled Caste.
Case No.
Case No.
L.R. Misc.
142 of 1982 before the Special Officer, Land Re forms, Central Division, Cuttack and the same was dismissed vide judgment and order dated February 2, 1983.
1, 3 and 4 for restoration of lands sold to respondent Nos.
Both these writ petitions were heard and disposed of by a companymon judgment impugned in these two appeals on special leave whereby the High Court, Orissa set aside and quashed the judgments and orders passed by the Special Officer, I.and Reforms, Central Division, Cuttack and allowed the writ petitions observing inter alia that Considering the cases in hand in the light of the above discussions, I have numberhesitation to companye to the companyclusion that the Revenue Authorities have companymitted a serious error of law in companying to the companyclusion that Rajaka caste was included within the numberified caste companymunity of Dhoba as their nature of work was similar.
These two appeals on special leave arise out of the companymon judgment of the High Court of Orissa made in O.J.C. Nos.
21 of 1979 under Section 22 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act stating inter alia that the sale made by her in favour of respondent No.
2 which showed the caste of Arjun Sethi as Dhoba.
1 who admittedly belonged to Brahmin Caste is void as the said sale was made without the permission of the Revenue Officer as mandatorily required under the provisions of the aid Act.
Against the said judgment and order, the respondent No.
131 of 1982 as well as O.L.R. No.
She produced the Caste certificate issued by tile Tehasildar, Betanoti which showed that she belonged to Dhoba caste which is recognised as a scheduled caste.
The Revenue Officer, vide his order dated March 19, 1979 rejected the case No.
2 filed a caste certificate of the Additional Tehasildar, Betanoti wherein the respondent No.
From the Judgment and Order dated 4,7.1986 of the Orissa High Court in OJC.
The suit lands must there fore, be restored to the possession of the respondent No.
42 of 1980 in the Court of Additional District Magistrate, Mayurbhanj.
1 thereafter filed two writ petitions called O.J.C. Nos.
1052 53 of 1990.
The respondent No.
The respondent No.
1, 3 and 4 on the ground that respondent No.
The respondent No.
2, Paramanand Sethi filed case No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
Nilamani Sethi was allowed vide order dated March 10, 1980 by the Revenue Officer directing the restora tion of the suit lands to respondent No.
1 filed O.L.R. Revision No.
1007 and 1008 of 1983 decided on July 4, 1986 whereby the High Court set aside and quashed the impugned orders made by the Special Officer, Land Reforms, Central Division, Cuttack in O.L.R. Revision No.
which certified that she belonged to a scheduled caste, Dhoba .
Paramanand Sethi.
21 of 1979 filed by the respondent No.
1, Prafulla Kumar Pati who is a brahmin by caste without obtaining prior written permission of the Revenue Officer as required under Section 22 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, the transactions had been rightly declared as void by the Revenue Officer.
Against this order, respondent No.
1007 and 1008 of 1983.
1 filed L.R. Appeal No.
Nilamani Sethi, wife of Late Bhanu Sethi also filed O.L.R. Misc.
She further filed two caste certificates issued by the two M.L.As.
5, Smt.
The respondent No.
The following Order of the Court was delivered ORDER Special leave granted.
She, therefore, does number cease to be a Dhoba even if she has described herself in the various deeds as Rajaka.
Since the transfer of the suit lands had been made to the respondent No.
He also filed the record of rights in the name of Arjun Sethi, father of respondent No.
Kundan Lal Jagga and K.K. Gupta for the Respondents.
K. Panda for the Appellants.
Agruments heard.
2 was a member of the Scheduled Caste Dhoba Community and the sales in question were hit by the provisions companytained in section 22 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960.
5 under Section 23 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act.
142 of 1982.
85 of 1977 filed by the respondent No.
The said appeal was dis missed vide judgment and order dated February 21, 1981 holding that the transferor had amply proved that she was Dhoba which is a Scheduled Caste by producing documentary evidence.
1007 and 1008 of 1983 against the judg ments and orders dated March 4, 1983 and February 2, 1983 respectively passed by the Special Officer, Land Reforms, Central Division, Cuttack.
85 of 1977 under section 22 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, against S Shri B. Mohapatra, Pra fulla Kumar Pati and Gadadhar Pati Respondent Nos.
1007 of 1983 is that on July 30, 1977, the respondent No.
